2005_1031_day18_pm

					1

2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

I N D E X

T O

W I T N E S S E S

TAMMY KITZMILLER, et al v. DOVER AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al

: : : : : :

FOR THE DEFENDANTS CASE NO. 4:04-CR-002688 Alan Bonsell By Mr. Gillen By Mr. Harvey

DIRECT

CROSS

REDIRECT

RECROSS

3 28

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS BENCH TRIAL AFTERNOON SESSION

BEFORE: DATE :

HON. JOHN E. JONES, III October 31, 2005 1:30 p.m. Courtroom No. 2, 9th Floor Federal Building Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Wendy C. Yinger, RPR U.S. Official Court Reporter

PLACE :

BY

:

APPEARANCES: ERIC J. ROTHSCHILD, ESQUIRE WITOLD J. WALCZAK, ESQUIRE STEPHEN G. HARVEY, ESQUIRE RICHARD B. KATSKEE, ESQUIRE THOMAS SCHMIDT, ESQUIRE For the Plaintiffs PATRICK T. GILLEN, ESQUIRE RICHARD THOMPSON, ESQUIRE ROBERT J. MUISE, ESQUIRE For the Defendants

3

4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

THE COURT:

All right.

1 2 3

Q. A.

Do you remember any other teachers speaking? Jen Miller spoke. And basically, what I can

DIRECT EXAMINATION (CONTINUED) BY MR. GILLEN: Q. All right. Alan, before we left off for lunch, I

recall is that, she still was on the point that she didn't want to teach intelligent design. Q. What about other board members? Was there any

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

we were approaching the October 18th board meeting. want to ask you some questions about that meeting and

response from board members to the public during the public comment section that you can recall? A. Basically that, you know, ID is not creationism,

your recollection of events, as soon as I get my outline in order. A. Q. A. Q. Do you remember attending that board meeting?

October 18th meeting? Yep. Yes. All right. Well, let's -- tell us what you

absolutely is not creationism, and that we weren't requiring them to teach it. Q. Do you remember telling members of the public

12 13 14 And 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

that during this meeting? A. I think that's, when they were saying that, at

recall beginning with the public comment portion of that meeting. A. Do you recall any comments being made?

some point, that was said. Q. What about the activities of board members when

I believe Bert Spahr spoke at that meeting.

Jen Miller spoke at that meeting. few other people that spoke. Q.

I believe there was a

the agenda item came up for consideration by the Board? Do you remember what happened at that time? A. Q. A. Yes. Tell us what you remember. Basically, there was a whole bunch of amendments

Do you remember anything that you heard at that

meeting from Bert Spahr? A. I believe it was still, we were on the same

subject of what they had talked about before of, they were afraid they were going to be sued, and I believe she still mentioned the fact of creationism being -intelligent design being the same as creationism, that type of thing.

that were proposed, I believe, by Noel Weinrich. Q. Well, with that in mind, let me ask you to look

at Defendants' Exhibit 64? A. Q. 64? Yeah. And direct your attention to the page with

5

6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

the bait stamp number 158 in the lower right-hand corner? A. Q. A. 158. What do you see there, Alan? I see basically a bunch of motions and calls for

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

or on the versions that -A. No. I mean, we had already done all this work on I wanted to get back, and I

these other proposals.

think, you know, I remember saying, I want to discuss the issue. I mean, this was just parliamentary I mean, it didn't have to do I mean, I didn't think it

votes on amendments and calls for questions, call of vote, questions, different things along that line. Q. Are these the votes on motions made by Mr.

procedures here going on. with the subject at hand. was. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Maybe he did. Okay. 187? Correct. Yes, I do. What is it?

I don't know.

Weinrich that you recall? A. Q. Yes. Okay. What was your reaction to Mr. Weinrich's

I'd ask you to go to Exhibit 187.

11 12

Do you recognize that document?

parliamentary maneuvers? A. I thought it was silly. I mean, he was just -And we weren't

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

it was almost like playing a game.

That is my own personal memoranda, which I have

talking about the real issue, the three things that we had that were that we were going to discuss. didn't serve any purpose, I didn't think. Q. Did you want to discuss any of the amended And this

written on, concerning the biology curriculum and also a draft of the curriculum with my personal -- that I had. Q. Okay. Let's look at it. Do you remember

articulating a position at this October 18th, 2004, board meeting about the various versions and what your goal was for this meeting? A. Well, I mean, it's written on here, you know, not And

versions that Mr. Weinrich was proposing that evening? A. again? Q. Yeah. I'm not asking you to look at the voting I'm asking you to give us your Well, I basically -- I mean -- can you say that

22 23 24 25

limited to any one theory, I have written on here. my goal was to try to bring something that everybody

record or anything.

recollection concerning when Mr. Weinrich made these motions, did you want to vote on what he was proposing

would come together on, everybody could agree on it, if it was possible. I mean, that was my objective to do

7

8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

that. Q. I'd ask you to turn to the page of Defendants'

1 2 3 4 5 Are they your 6 7 Yes. And would you read the notes for the record? The whole -- just my notes that I had, 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

curriculum committee's version to add this note? A. Yes, I did make a motion to add this to this

Exhibit 187 that has the number 3771 in the lower left-hand corner. A. Q. notes? A. Q. A. Okay. There are notations on that page.

particular -- this -- this concept here. Q. Okay. Well, your response points to a need for a Whose The staff

question. version?

What were you adding the note to? The Board curriculum committee's?

administration? A. It was basically the board curriculum

committee's. Q. And why were you adding your note to that

handwritten notes? Q. A. Yes. I had a big A with a circle around it, and then I

version? A. Well, I already knew that the board curriculum

committee came through with this, and the teachers had problems with teaching, you know, ID. And so this note,

had in parentheses underneath the context concepts o, note: Q. The origins of life is not taught. Did you make that notation on the evening of

I thought, would take care of all those, would take care of that. Q. A. And how did you think it would take care of that? Origins of life is not taught, so that should

October 18th? A. Q. A. Yes. And why did you do that? Because what -- what I had tried to do is to get

take care of their problem of the origins being taught. It's not taught. Q. Do you remember how your motion was received by

everybody, the teachers, administration, the board members all together, and I thought, by changing the one, taking the one note from the one, and putting it with this, that would take care of it. Q. Did you make a motion to amend the Board

the board on that evening? A. Yes. I believe it was straight nine, zero vote

to include it. Q. And was the board curriculum committee's version

9

10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

of the curriculum change, as amended, by your motion, approved by the board on the evening of October 18th, 2004? A. Q. Yes. And do you remember the final vote on that

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

it was inconsiderate, especially saying, you know, they resigned without even mentioning the fact that they were going to do this ahead of time. Q. Well, you know, I'm going to ask you a couple of

questions, but one of the most difficult for me to ask certainly personally is this. Did you tell Casey Brown

version? A. I believe the final, final version was a six to

that she was going to hell as a result of her actions on the board or her resignation? A. Q. No, absolutely not. Would you ever say something like that to

three vote. Q. So you worked out the actual final version at the

meeting on that evening? A. Q. Yes, with adding that on. And again, in doing so, what was your goal in

someone? A. Q. No, I would not. Is that a very serious, in fact, hateful thing

proposing this approach to the matter? A. The whole goal was to try to bring the people I mean, that's -- that was the whole goal. That's what

for someone to say, in your judgment? A. Q. Absolutely, it is. What happened after the October 18th, 2004, Do you recall the next step seen from

together.

That's what -- you know, I was president. I'm trying to do.

I'm trying to lead, you know,

meeting next?

everybody together and try to get consensus, if it's possible to do. Q. Do you remember the Browns resigning on the

your perspective as the chairman of the board? A. Well, I guess we were trying to get together

exactly how we were going to do this, implement it. Q. Well, let me ask you to look at Defendants'

evening of this meeting? A. Q. Yes. And what was your personal reaction to their

Exhibit 65? A. Q. A. 65. Do you recognize that document, Alan? Yes, this is a draft of what the teachers were to

resignation? A. Well, I thought it was ridiculous, and I thought

11

12

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

read in biology class. Q. A. Q. Do you recall receiving this document? Yes. Was there some discussion of making students

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Once we have 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q.

Well, did you have an impression at this time now

concerning the accuracy of the coverage of the events at this meeting? A. I think at this point, I think they're still

aware of intelligent design by reading a statement when the board held its meeting on October 18th? A. Q. Ask that again. Well, this statement, where did it come from?

reporting, you know, we're going to teach creationism. Like I said, it went on. And also, we were going to

teach, I remember teaching, that was in the news media, through the papers, through the news -- TV. That was I

Had there been some discussion by the board and administration about it? A. There would have to be something.

on, I think, months after this proposal was passed. believe it was still being reported that we were teaching it. Q. Did you speak to any reporters about the

this, now it's not being taught, so we have to find a way of how we're going to implement it in the curriculum. Q. Did you play any role in drafting the specific

reporting on the board's activities relating to this curriculum change adopted on October 18th, 2004? A. Like I said, I have said things at meetings, in I've said things to reporters outside of I mean, it was sort of a constant, a constant

language of this statement? A. Q. A. I don't remember specific language, no. Do you recall at least seeing -Oh, I saw it, yes. Could I have made But I just don't remember. Now we have a

meetings. meetings.

that you -- that I would do, because they kept doing things like this. I mean, they kept saying teaching They would say creationism

suggestions? Q. Okay.

It's possible.

instead of making aware.

Let me ask you again.

instead of intelligent design. I mean, it's -- it's -- but, yes, I did. remember talking, having a conversation with Joe Maldonado. And it was my understanding through the I

contentious meeting here on the 18th with members resigning. Did you read the papers and their coverage

of this meeting? A. I'm sure I did.

conversation that he thought the two things were

13

14

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

interchangeable, that creationism and intelligent design were. MR. HARVEY: MR. GILLEN: to remedy the situation. Objection, Your Honor, hearsay. All I can say is, he's trying He's talking to the reporter.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

MR. HARVEY:

This again is hearsay, and if

he's testifying just as to his understanding, I don't see any relevance as to what his understanding of Mr. Maldonado's impression is, at least as of this date. MR. GILLEN: It is highly relevant because,

He has an understanding of the reporter's view of the matter, whether they're separate or the same. all. THE COURT: impression. I think it transcended just his I'll sustain That's

from the standpoint of the board, they believed that their position has been mischaracterized. They've been

asked -- all the witnesses have been asked numerous times, did you ever complain, did you ever ask for corrections, and so on. Mr. Bonsell has testified that he has, and now what he's, understanding from this request is, it won't be observed because of the reporter's view of the matter. THE COURT: the question. Well, very frankly, he answered

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

I think it got into hearsay.

the objection, and I'll strike what appears to be a direct response from the reporter in this case. MR. GILLEN: BY MR. GILLEN: Q. Alan, let me ask you, you indicated that you Okay. Thank you, Your Honor.

spoke with Joe Maldonado about his reporting specifically as it relates to the use of the term creationism to describe intelligent design? A. Q. Yes. As a result of that conversation, did you come

He answered the question previously, and

I said that it would be stricken -MR. GILLEN: THE COURT: Right. -- that it was his understanding

that Mr. Maldonado viewed the two terms as interchangeable. I said that answer was hearsay and You've asked

away with an impression or understanding of how he viewed them, whether the same or different? A. My impression is -MR. HARVEY: THE COURT: Objection, Your Honor. Wait, sir. Hang on.

sustained the objection and struck it.

almost the same question again, and I'm going to sustain the objection again because all we're coming back to is, I think, what amounts to, and I understand that you have

15

16

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

to try, but I think it's either side door or back door hearsay, and I'll sustain the objection on that basis. It's a bench trial. I heard the testimony. There's no

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

concerning something that maybe we could, you know, put on, if it's possible, to put on the website, the Dover website, so -- just to let -- give the people of Dover a little bit of an update of what's going on. Q. This document is dated November 12th, 2004. Let

point to double back at this point. MR. GILLEN: BY MR. GILLEN: Q. Okay.

Let's move on.

Thank you, Your Honor.

me ask you, on the evening that the curriculum change was adopted by the board, was there ever any discussion of doing a press release? A. Q. No, none. Did you have any intention of doing a press

Did you take it upon yourself personally to do

anything else to address the press coverage as you saw? A. Well, like I said all along, I've talked to I have talked

numerous, numerous editors of the papers. to the reporters.

I know it got so bad that our

release when you voted for the curriculum change? A. Q. Not at that time, no. So why are you providing this document to Dr.

superintendent wouldn't even return calls anymore. Q. Let me ask you this. Did you direct Dr. Nilsen

to do anything as a result of this problem you perceived? A. Yes. One of the things I said is that, I think

Nilsen on November 12th, 2004? A. There again, because the inaccuracies that was

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

put out to the public in our local media. Q. Did you draft the press release or did you direct

it's necessary to get some sort of press release out to tell the people what we're actually doing, so they know what we're really doing. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Let me ask you to look at Defendants' Exhibit 83. 83. Do you recognize that document, Alan? Yes. What is it? It's a document that I sent to Dr. Nilsen

Rich Nilsen to do so? A. Well, this one I had sent to him, but they were This was just

coming up with another press release.

sort of a stop gap thing until we got an actual press release. Q. 103. A. Let me ask you to look at Defendants' Exhibit Do you recognize that document, Alan? Yes.

17

18

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q. A.

What is it? That's the biology curriculum press release from

1 2 3 4 5

involved, that -- because, I believe, at the time I was saying, you know, the teachers have been involved in it. Q. Okay. Let me ask you to look at Defendants'

the board of directors. Q. A. Q. Was that prepared by Dr. Nilsen at your request? Yes. Okay. Do you recall the press release eliciting

Exhibit 184. A. Q. A. Q. A. 184? Yeah. Yes. Okay. What is this? Do you recognize that document?

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

a response from the faculty? A. Q. Yes, it did. With that in mind, I would ask you to look at Do you recognize that

This is a history of biology statement, teacher

Defendants' Exhibit 106. document? A. Q. A. Q. A. Yes.

edits, and some other information that I personally wrote down on the bottom that were additions to this. Q. A. Q. Okay. Those handwritten notations are yours?

Do you remember seeing that? Yes. What did you understand its thrust to be? I guess, basically they're writing a letter to

At the bottom of the paper, yes. But just to be clear, were these put on the

document November 19th or later? A. Q. This would have been later. Let me ask you, do you recall the teachers or its

Dr. Nilsen objecting on some of the things that are being put out there about the most recent press release. Q. A. And what was your reaction to this document? Well, I couldn't believe it, because they've been

union putting out a press release? A. Q. I believe they did put out a press release, yes. If you would, look at Defendants' Exhibit 105.

involved all along in the process. Q. A. Did you speak to Rich Nilsen about this document? I believe so. And -- because I wanted to know, I

Do you recognize that document, Alan? A. Q. A. Yes. What is it? It's a press release from basically the teachers

wanted to see, okay, sort of get a glimpse of how many times or what -- to show that the teachers had been

union or the BAEAEA.

19

20

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q. A.

What was your reaction to that document? Well, it sort of went back to the other letter.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Q. A.

And what was your reaction to that document? Well, again, they must have been reading our

I mean, they're saying, has developed, exaggerated it, which really, they did help to develop it. Q. Did you agree with the teachers' position, as

local media because it says in here about teaching intelligent design, and we're not teaching it. Q. There's a few steps remaining in this story as

articulated in that press release? A. Q. No, no. Did you ask anyone to take any action as a result

it's been outlined so far, and I want to ask you about them. Do you understand that Rich Nilsen placed the Of

Pandas book in the library? A. Q. Yes. Do you believe that his decision to do so was

of that press release? A. Q. To take any action? Yeah. Look again at 184. Was there anything

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

consistent with the board's curriculum change adopted on October 18th? A. Q. Sure. They're reference books.

that the board or you or the administration did in response to that difference of opinion reflected in these two press releases? A. Well, that's why we put this together, to show,

Has any member of the school board called for a

movement of those texts from the library? A. Q. No. Did there come a time when you understood that

you know, what we were saying was true, that they were involved in this process. Q. Okay. Let me ask you to look at Defendants' Do you have that?

the teachers had not read the statement that had been drafted as a result of the curriculum change? A. Q. Can you say that again? Did there come a time when you came to understand

Exhibit 119. A. Q. A. Q. A. Yes.

Do you recognize this? Yes. What is it? It is a press release from the Discovery

that the teachers had not read the statement we looked at already? A. Yes, basically that they wouldn't read the

Institute.

statement.

21

22

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q. A.

And what was your reaction to that? Well, personally, I thought it was clear

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A.

Yes, after we did -- we thought it would be a

good idea to, because the press release basically went out to the press and onto the website, and we wanted to get out something to all of the people in Dover, so they're the ones, it's their school, they need to know. I thought that because of, you know, the problems of communications with the media, that they needed to have this press release so they could see exactly what we were doing. Q. A. Whose idea was the newsletter? I believe I came up with the idea of the

insubordination. Q. A. Did you call for any action? No, I didn't, because I figured, at this point,

it's, you know, it will be settled here. Q. Did you later come to know who read the statement

to the students? A. Q. The administration did. When you voted for the curriculum change on

October 18th, 2004, was there any discussion by board members of having the administrators read the statement? A. Was there any discussion that we wanted them to

newsletter, and I believe the board concurred, and the newsletter was put out. Q. When the board voted to approve the curriculum

read that? Q. A. Q. Yes. No. Did any board member direct -- let me ask you,

change on October 18th, 2004, was there any discussion of preparing a newsletter about the curriculum change? A. Q. No, none at all. When you voted for the curriculum change on

did you direct the administration to read the statement? A. Q. No. To your knowledge, did any board member direct

October 18th, did you intend to issue a newsletter about the curriculum change? A. Q. A. No. So what was your purpose in doing that now? Again, like I said, to get the actual truth out

the administrators to read the statement? A. Q. No. Did there come a point at which you directed Dr.

Nilsen to at least prepare or help prepare a newsletter for the district on this issue?

to the people of Dover. Q. Now at some point, did you become aware of a

23

24

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

donation of books to Dover that was also linked in some way to the biology curriculum? A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Yes. And about when was that? I believe that was the spring of this year. How did the books -Somewhere in that area. How did the books come to your attention? They were -- I guess they were sent to the school

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

library collection? A. Q. Yes, yes. As you sit here today, do you know where those

books have been placed in the library collection? A. Q. That would be the librarian's job. Did there come a time after the donation of the

books where you became aware that Rich Nilsen had changed the statement read to students in light of that donation? A. Q. Yes. When you learned of that, did you think his

district, and probably the administration let us know. Q. A. Did you ask who donated the books? Not really. I mean, they told me it came from a

change to the statement was consistent with the purpose of the board's curriculum change adopted on October 18th? A. Q. A. Yes. And why is that? I have no -- I mean -- wait a minute. Ask the

group, but I didn't ask who. Q. A. Q. A. Did you review the books? I looked at the books. Why did you do that? Just to make sure they weren't, I mean,

pornographic or something that wouldn't be something that should be put in the library or used. Q. Well, I mean, you've referenced some concerns Did it strike you as a little odd at

question again, please. Q. Well, why? If you thought it was acceptable for

him to do that, why? A. Q. Acceptable for him to change? Change the statement. Why? What was your point?

about the books.

the time the way they were donated, the way they arrived? A. Q. Yeah, they just sort of came on our door step. Did the board approve adding the books to the

Why did you see that as consistent? A. Because we had more books and more things on the

subject, more literature, more books on the subject.

25

26

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

And he changed it. that. Q.

And I didn't see a problem with More material.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

a lot of things. are up.

Some of the things, our test scores

More references. All right.

You know, we've instituted full-day

As we're wrapping up here, I know

kindergarten, the only school district in York County that has that. We went back to do remediation so that we try to get all the kids at the same place, I believe, by like third place, because we don't want any of our children to be left behind. As far as taxes, we're the only

you're engaged in this litigation, but do you feel that your service on the board has been a service in which you've tried to promote and have enjoyed some success in promoting the interest of the Dover community? A. Q. Yes. Yes, I do believe that.

And can you just explain briefly why you have

school district this year that doesn't have a tax increase. So we looked at everything. 8th grade test scores. Our 8th grade, our

enjoyed some success? MR. HARVEY: relevance. MR. GILLEN: I'm trying to demonstrate that Your Honor, objection,

11 12 13 14 15 16

Five years ago in the year 2000, And this year, we're So we -- I

we were 13th out of 15 schools.

he has, throughout his tenure, acted as a board member to serve the best interest of the community he serves by his -THE COURT: goes to weight. I'll allow some latitude. It

number 1 in the county with our test scores.

think, I believe, not for a pat on the back or anything like that, but I believe that's what we came here for, to make Dover the best it can be. And this isn't -- I mean, there's a lot of other things that Dover can be proud of. Q. Did you see your participation in the board's

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

It's a bench trial.

I'm going to hear So I'll

the answer because we got to keep moving here. overrule the objection. BY MR. GILLEN: Q. A. Just briefly, Alan, as the judge said? Just quickly.

distributions on this curriculum change as part of that same goal? A. Q. Yes. As a board member, ever since you sat on the

Some of the things that we've done I mean, we tried to work

over the last four years.

together as a team, and we have been successful in doing

board, have you ever taken any step that you thought

27

28

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

would lead to the teaching of creationism in the high school at Dover? A. Q. None whatsoever. Have you ever tried to take any step to prevent

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

A. Q.

Absolutely not. Do you have any objection to her learning about

evolutionary theory in biology? A. No, none whatsoever. MR. GILLEN: THE COURT: you. I have no further questions. All right, Mr. Gillen. Thank

the teaching of evolutionary theory? A. Q. None. In this 2004 period, when the science text, more

Cross-examine, Mr. Harvey. MR. HARVEY: Just one minute, Your Honor,

specifically the biology text, proposed by the teachers were up for purchase, did you ever try and obstruct the purchase of the text they recommended? A. Q. No. You mentioned your daughter earlier. Is she a

while I get some materials. THE COURT: MR. HARVEY: Take the time you need. Your Honor, may I approach the

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

witness and hand him some documents? THE COURT: Mr. Harvey? MR. HARVEY: Your Honor, I'm not in a book. You may. What book are you in,

student at Dover High School now? A. Q. A. Q. Yes, she's in 9th grade. Is she taking biology? Yes. And do you have an understanding concerning

That's a special notebook we made up. THE COURT: the -MR. HARVEY: THE COURT: Yes, sir. That's fine. Are you going to put them up on

whether she'll be taught evolutionary theory in biology? A. Q. A. Yes. What's your understanding? My understanding is, she'll be taught

CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. HARVEY: Q. Mr. Bonsell, I've just handed you a notebook of

evolutionary theory, the micro evolution theory, in class. Q. Are you going to tell your daughter to opt out of

24 25

various exhibits we may refer to your testimony today, and I've given you a copy of your deposition transcript

this section dealing with evolution?

29

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

that was taken on January the 3rd, 2005, and a copy of your deposition transcript that was taken on April the 13th, 2005. A. Q. Do you have those in front of you?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

there for $850.00 that's been marked P-80, correct? A. Q. A. Q. That, I couldn't tell you. Okay. I don't know.

But he definitely gave you a check, right?

Yes, I do. You recall being deposed on those dates, January

Oh, yes, uh-huh. And he told you that these were donations that he That's what you told us in your direct

the 3rd of 2005 and April the 13th of 2005? A. Q. Yes. You were here for Mr. Buckingham's testimony last

had received? exam, right? A. Q. Yes.

week, weren't you? A. Q. Not all of it, no. I thought I saw you in the room. And I think you

Did he tell you that these donations came from

people at his church? A. Q. A. Q. No. He didn't tell you that, is that correct? Yes. Now, do you remember former board member Larry

11 12 13 14 15

were in the room when he testified about the donation, donations that were given to him at his church in the amount of $850.00. A. Q. Were you here during that part?

Yes, I did hear that. And he testified about a check. And I'd like to

Snook asking about the source of the donation of Pandas at a board meeting in November 2004? A. Q. I believe I do remember that. And Mr. Snook specifically asked the board to say

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

show you the check.

It's number P-80 in your notebook.

And Matt will bring it up on the screen. A. Q. A. Q. P-80? Yes, sir. Okay. And today, you told us in your direct examination

who gave the Pandas to the school district, correct? A. Q. I believe that's what he said. And nobody from the board provided him with any

information, either that time or any other time, isn't that right? A. Q. Not that I recall. You didn't provide him with any information, did

that Mr. Buckingham had given you a check, right? A. Q. Yes. And as a matter of fact, that is the check right

31

32

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

you? A. Q.

You certainly know that? No. And you recall, and we just discussed, your Did you know

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

A. Q.

That I had a conversation with him? Yes, that you spoke -- that you spoke to Mr.

Buckingham about the donation of this check? A. Q. I don't -- I don't believe so. Well, let's just take a moment to look at your

deposition was taken on January the 3rd.

that it was taken that day so that the Plaintiffs -- it was taken pursuant to court order -- so that the Plaintiffs could decide whether or not to move for a temporary retraining order. time? A. I knew they were taking depositions for a Did you know that at the

deposition. A. Q. A. Q. Okay. Let's go to your January 3rd deposition. January 3rd, all right. Yes, sir. Page 13, beginning on line 6. And it

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

particular reason. Q. A. Q. Did you know it was for that particular reason? I'm sorry. Could you repeat that?

covers a few pages, and so we're going to go through it. I apologize if it's lengthy, but I think it's important. A. Q. All right. Mr. Rothschild asked you the following questions Question, Are you

So the Plaintiffs could decide whether to seek a

temporary restraining order to prevent the board from implementing its policy in January of 2005? A. Q. I believe so. And when Mr. Rothschild at that deposition asked

and you gave the following answers:

aware that 60 copies of this book were donated to the school district? Answer, Yes. Question, Who donated Answer, I don't

those books to the school district? know. Question, You don't know?

you about the donation of the books to the school district, you didn't tell him that you had received any check from Mr. Buckingham, did you? A. Q. I don't believe so. And you didn't tell him that you had a

Answer, No, I don't.

The question again? Question, Who donated those books? donated the books? Answer, Who

They wanted to remain anonymous. Answer, Do I

Question, Do you know who donated them? know the people that donated them?

conversation with Mr. Buckingham on that subject, did you?

Question, Yes.

Answer, I don't know -- I don't know all the people that

33

34

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

donated them, no. Question, Do you know any of the people who donated them? Answer, One. Question, Who was that? Answer,

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Question, Did your father say anything to you about his intention to donate books or his offer to donate books to the school district? there was something said. Question, This morning I took the deposition of School Superintendent Nilsen. He testified that you Answer, I'm sure

Answer, Donald Bonsell. He is my father.

Question, Who is that?

Question, Do you know the names of Answer, No.

anybody else who donated these books?

Question, How did you become aware that these individuals, including your father, intended to donate the books? Answer, Repeat that again.

communicated him to the fact -- to him the fact of this offer to donate the Pandas books. Is that accurate? Question,

Answer, That I was going to donate the books?

Question, How did you become aware that your father, as well as other individuals, intended to donate the Pandas book to the district? Answer, I believe the

That you communicated to Mr. Nilsen that the offer was being made. Answer, That is what I am saying. I don't

remember exactly how it came about. saying.

That's what I am

offer was made after there was complaints of using school district money. money for what? Question, Using school district

Question, Did you communicate to Mr. Nilsen that an offer was being made to donate Pandas to the district? Answer, I'm not sure. Question, Do you know Answer, No.

Answer, To buy the books, I believe. Answer, I'm not

Question, Who was the offer made to? sure.

where the Pandas book were purchased from? I mean, no.

Question, When was the first time you became aware of the offer to donate the books? Answer, After

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Question, Did you contribute any money to

the purchase of the Pandas books that were donated to the school district? Answer, No.

the complaint, the complaint from -- I believe it was from Barrie Callahan. aware of the offer? Question, How did you become Answer, I'm not sure of the exact Question, Did your father say

Question, Did you suggest to your father that he donate the books? Answer, No. Question, did you Answer, No.

way I became aware of it. anything to you?

request that he donate the books?

Then there's an objection, and the

Question, Was the first time you heard anything about a donation when your father told you he intended to do it?

question was restated.

35

36

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Answer, Repeat that again. Question, Was the first time you became aware of any possible donation when you father told you he intended to do it? Answer, Well, he wasn't -- I mean, Question,

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 I 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q.

And you understood that he was seeking that

specific information, not that specific information, but that he asked you questions that should have called for that information, isn't that correct? A. Q. No, I don't agree with that. Mr. Bonsell, he asked you, Question, The only

as far as I know, he wasn't the only person. You don't know who the other people are? don't know who the other people are.

Answer, I

person you could have spoken to about the books was your father, correct? books. Answer, Yes, as far as donating the

Question, You have never spoken to anybody else who was involved with the donation? know the other people. Answer, I don't

I guess they offered to pay for the books and

Question, The only person you

they got the books and gave them to the school district. Question, They offered to whom? communicated? How was the offer I'm

could have spoken to about the books was your father, correct? Answer, Yes, as far as donating the books.

Answer, That is what I'm saying.

guess they offered to pay for the books, and they got the books, and gave them to the school district. Question, They offered to whom? offer communicated? How was the

trying to think of exactly how it was done. remember exactly how it was said or done.

I don't

And you didn't provide -- that was the question and answer. And you did not provide Mr. Rothschild with

Answer, That is what I am saying. I

I am trying to think about exactly how it was done. don't remember exactly how it was said or done.

any information or tell him in any way that you had received a check from Mr. Buckingham, correct? A. I didn't receive -- that I didn't receive a check No, I already said, I haven't -- I

Was that your testimony on January the 3rd, 2005, Mr. Bonsell? A. Q. Yes, it was. And you didn't mention anything to Mr. Rothschild

from Mr. Buckingham?

did not tell him about me receiving a check from Mr. Buckingham. misspoke. Q. A. Well, Mr. Bonsell -I mean, in my opinion. But I still, you know, don't believe I

about getting a donation, a check from Mr. Buckingham for $850.00, did you? A. No, I didn't.

37

38

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q.

Today, you told us that you recall Mrs.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Q. please. A. Q.

Go to your January 3rd deposition at page 50,

Buckingham speaking at a board meeting in June of 2004, correct? A. Q. A. Q. Do you remember that?

Page 50.

Okay. And he's referring to a news

In June 2004? Yes. Yes. And you said that she went on for a great length,

And line 20.

article, which we're going to look at in a minute. Question, After that, there are remarks attributed to Mr. Buckingham's wife, Charlotte, on the subject of creationism. Do you remember her saying what is Answer, I remember

and you felt uncomfortable gaveling her down because she was the wife of a board member, correct? A. Q. A. Q. Oh, Mrs. Buckingham, okay. Yes, Mrs. Buckingham. Yes, yes. And you said that she probably mentioned

attributed to her in the article?

Mrs. Buckingham coming up and talking at public comment, but I don't remember what she said. testimony on January the 3rd? A. Q. On January the 3rd, it was. And your testimony is something different today, Wasn't that your

creationism, isn't that right? A. Q. It's very possible. And you testified today that her comments were

isn't it? A. Only to the extent that I remember more of what I mean, I did say that she

very religious in nature, isn't that correct? A. Q. What I can remember now, yes. Now Mr. Rothschild asked you about this at your

she said then versus now.

did -- I remember her coming up and talking. Q. Well, let's take a look at what has been marked

deposition on January 3rd, 2005, and you didn't mention this either, did you? A. Q. that? A. I don't remember it, no, but -I don't know. Do you remember Mr. Rothschild asking you about

as P-54. A. Q. P-54. That is a June 15th article, June 15th, 2004,

article from the York Dispatch written by Heidi Bernhard-Bubb, isn't that correct? A. Yes.

25

39

40

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q.

Now you actually were provided that article and

1 2 3

A. Q.

Yes. And P-54 is a June 15th article in the York In fact, it's that

asked to look at the second page, the seventh full paragraph, the one that says -- Matt, could you highlight it, the one that begins, his remarks. that says, His remarks were echoed by his wife, Charlotte Buckingham, who said that teaching evolution was in direct opposition to God's teaching, and that the people of Dover could not in good conscience allow the district to teach anything about creationism, close quote. A. Q. Do you see that? Yes, I do. That's the specific statement that you were asked The one

Dispatch by Heidi Bernhard-Bubb. same article, isn't that correct? A. Q. It looks like it is.

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

And then if you look on page 50, that's what he

was referring to when he says, on line 20, after that, there are remarks attributed to Mr. Buckingham's wife, Charlotte, on the subject of creationism. that? A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. Okay. Which line is that again? Do you see

That is on page 50, line 20. Page 50? Yes, page 50, line 20. Page 50, line 20. Okay.

to look at your deposition by Mr. Rothschild before you gave the testimony we just discussed, isn't that correct? A. Q. That, I don't know. Well, take a look again at the deposition. And,

That's the exact same article, P-54, that you

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

were asked to look at your deposition when you gave that testimony that you didn't recall Mrs. Buckingham saying anything to that effect or you didn't remember what she said, correct? A. Q. Yes. In January, that's what I said, yes.

if you begin, and I'm not going to -- if you begin on page 45? A. Q. A. Q. Page 45? Yes. Okay. You see on line 8, he's asking you to turn to the

But the question is, you looked at P-54, that

exact same article, and you read the language that I read to you from P-54 about what Mrs. Buckingham said at the June meeting, and that's what you were looking at,

June 15th article in the York Dispatch by Heidi Bernhard-Bubb, isn't that correct?

41

42

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

and you read just before you gave that testimony at your deposition, isn't that correct? A. So you're saying, page 50, you asked me to look

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 50.

A.

I'm not sure if he said them or not.

Okay.

That's on 19? Q. Right. That was your testimony, right, on page

at this page? Q. A. 50. Yes, sir. And where does that -- I don't see that on page I see the question, what we already went over a

A. Q.

All right. Then the very next thing he says is that, after

that, there were remarks attributed to Mr. Buckingham's wife on the subject of creationism. A. Q. Yes, I do. Now if you go back to P-54, and you look at the Do you see that?

minute or two ago, but you're saying I was looking at this page when -Q. this. A. there? Q. A. Q. That's right. Oh, okay. He's asking you a whole series of questions about Yes, yes, if you look again. If you go to page 45 -Oh, back to 45. Okay. Continues on through Let's go through

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

seventh full paragraph, where it's talking about the statements by Charlotte Buckingham, all right, do you see that? A. Q. Okay. If you see the statement, just before that in the

article is about a liberal agenda chipping away at the rights of Christians in this country? A. Q. Okay. Okay. I see that. Now what I'm asking you is, P-54 and

this article. A. Q. Okay. Then if you go to page 50, he says, now this is

on line 15, after that, there is a statement attributed to Mr. Buckingham that the liberal agenda was chipping away at the rights of Christians in this country. you know if he made that statement? sure if he said that or not. right? Do

specifically that statement, seventh full paragraph on the second page, that's the statement that you looked at your deposition just before you told Mr. Rothschild that you couldn't remember anything that Mrs. Buckingham said at the meeting, isn't that right, Mr. Bonsell? A. That's what I said in January, yes.

Answer, I'm not

That was your testimony,

Correct, that was your testimony on that date?

43

44

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q.

And that was P-54, you were looking at that time

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

would you bring it up, P-21, and highlight the first and second items under Mr. Bonsell's name there. A. Q. A. right. Q. If you would like, you can look on the screen or I'm sorry. P-21. Oh, okay. So just look on the screen here. All Which number is this?

in that specific statement? A. saying. That's what it appears to be, from what you're I guess there is no other articles on that

date, so I would imagine that's it. Q. Mr. Bonsell, you testified this morning about Do you

when you ran for the school board in 2001. recall that? A. Q. Yes.

you can look at the exhibit. A. Q. All right. You talked about this morning, this same document And is

And is it your testimony that you didn't bring up

creationism or school prayer at any time during the course of running for that office? A. That was nothing that we -- that was nothing that

with a different number on it from your counsel.

it your testimony that you did not say or bring up the subject of creationism at that school board retreat on January the 9th of 2002? A. Q. Did I say I didn't bring it up? I'm asking you now. Did you mention creationism

we ran on, no. Q. And my question is, you didn't bring it up at any

time during the course of running for office, is that correct? A. In the course of running for office? No. Say that question again. I don't

at that school board retreat? A. As my testimony earlier, I must have. I must

18 19 20 21 22 23 24

believe. Q.

have brought it up at the board retreat. Q. A. Do you remember bringing it up? I don't remember. There again, I don't remember

I'd like to know whether at any time when you ran

for school board in 2001, you brought up the subject of creationism or school prayer? A. did. Q. In my running for school board, I don't believe I Not that I recall. We looked at this morning a document. Matt,

what I wish I did, but I don't remember what I said about it, no. Q. I'm just asking not whether you remember what you Do you remember bringing it up at all at

25

said about it.

45

46

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

that school board retreat? A. I don't remember bringing it up. Like I said,

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 It might have been 20 21 22 23 24 25

paragraph on 19, please. it.

I'm sorry.

18 and 19.

That's

You were here for the opening statement in this

Dr. Nilsen wrote it down, so I must have said it. Q. If you could take a moment to look at what has Matt, would you please bring that

case, weren't you? A. Q. I believe so, yes. Yes. Alan

been marked as P-25. up?

And Mr. Gillen said the following words:

Focus on the third item under Mr. Bonsell's name. Now, Mr. Bonsell, do you see that, the third item

Bonsell is a perfect example.

He came to the board

without any background in education of the law, just a sincere desire to serve his fellow citizens. By virtue of his personal reading, he was aware of intelligent design theory, and that 300 or so scientists had signed a statement indicating that biologists were exaggerating claims for the theory. had read about the famous Piltdown man hoax. interest in creationism. He

under your name, under what's been marked as P-25, is creationism again? A. Q. Yes, sir. Do you remember bringing that up at the school

board retreat in March of 2003? A. Again, I don't really remember any of this or,

He had an

from my previous testimony, I believe I said, I don't remember this or any of the other subjects from this or other board retreats. Q. Do you remember that you had an interest in

He wondered whether it could Do you see those words?

be discussed in the classroom. A. Q. Yes, I do.

Now is it true that you had an interest in

creationism when you were a member of the school board in 2002 and 2003? A. Did I have an interest in it?

creationism, as your counsel said in his opening statement? A. Well, I have said it twice at two board retreats, That's why I said, it could be as a

a question about it. to be more specific. Q. Sure.

But I don't know -- maybe you need

so it must be.

question in that, as just like I have testified about prayer. Q. Well, let's just put aside what was said at the

Matt, would you please bring up Mr. The -- no, the

Gillen's opening statement at page 19?

last full paragraph on page 18 and the first full

board retreats and focus on what you remember about your

47

48

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

own self during that time period.

Do you remember that

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

an interest at all in creationism? Q. Yes, sir. And the question is more specific.

you had an interest in creationism with respect to the Dover public schools in 2002 and 2003? A. Did I have an interest in creationism in the I mean, what do you mean by that?

Actually, it's in 2002 and 2003, whether you had any interest in creationism that related to the Dover schools? A. Q. A. Q. Probably. That you can recall? Probably. Whether it was said or not, whether it was just

public schools? Q.

I mean, did you think to yourself, gosh, I'd like

to have creationism in the schools or I wonder if I could have creationism in the school or what would it be like if we had creationism in the schools or any thoughts whatsoever, Mr. Bonsell? A. I don't think in that respect. I think more in Is it not? Is

in your head and never said? A. Q. Probably. Now I'd like you to take a look at what has been And we'll bring that up on the board.

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

the respect of, you know, is it taught? it even mentioned?

In what -- it's sort of like, you

marked as P-26.

know, in what way does Dover look at this, if they do? I mean, I could see something like that. Q. I'm not asking you if you could see something I'm asking you if you have a memory of

This document is a memo from Trudy Peterman to Mr. Baksa, Mr. Reading, and Mrs. Spahr, isn't that correct? A. small. Q. It's P-26 in your notebook. That might be easier Do you have a number I can look at? It's awful

like that.

wanting to know how the Dover schools dealt with creationism? A. Q. That could be. That could be or that is? Either you remember or

for you to look at. A. Q. A. Q. Yes, I do.

Do you have that in front of you?

21 22 23 24 25

That's dated April the 1st, 2003? April 1st, 2003, yes. Now if you'd look at the last sentence of the Matt, would you highlight that,

you don't, Mr. Bonsell. A. time? Did I ever have an -- could you ask that one more I'm trying to get an understanding of where Did I ever have

first paragraph. please?

you're coming from with the question.

That says, Mr. Baksa further stated to Mrs.

49

50

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Spahr on March 31, 2003, that this board member wanted 50 percent of the topic of evolution to involve the teaching of creationism. A. Q. I see that. And the memo doesn't identify who the board Do you see that?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Q.

Sure.

Go to the second -- your second deposition

on April the 13th. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. April 13th one. Beginning on page 45. I'm sorry? Beginning on page 45, line 20. Line 20. He asked you, and I'll -- did he not -- and my

member is, who wanted it, correct? A. Q. Not in that sentence, no. It doesn't actually anywhere in that whole

paragraph or the letter, isn't that correct? A. Q. A. Q. I didn't -- do you want me to read it? Well, look at the first paragraph. Okay. All right. That doesn't identify who the board

question to you is, Did you ever, did you personally ever express that to Mr. Baksa, that you wanted 50 percent of the topic of evolution to involve the teaching of creationism? Answer, No.

13 14 15 16 17 18 He 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. Q. A. Q. date? A. Q.

Question, Did you ever express to Mr. Baksa or in Mr. Baksa's presence that you wanted 50 percent of something else to be taught along with the topic of evolution? Answer, No, I don't believe so.

member was who wanted this? A. Q. No. No, it doesn't. Now Mr. Rothschild asked you about this

Right.

at your deposition on April 13, and he showed you P-26, which we just looked at, which is one of the documents that says creationism next to your name. Excuse me.

Do you see that? Yes, I do. That was your testimony on that date, right? Yes. Mr. Bonsell, that was your testimony on that

didn't -- not -- it's P-26 in this document.

I'm sorry.

He showed you this document at your deposition, and he asked if you recalled advocating the teaching of something 50/50 with evolution in or around this time, April 1, 2003. A. Do you recall that?

Yes, yes. Now that was before the Defendants produced

Can you show it to me, please?

either P-21 or P-25, the documents that we just looked

51

52

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

at that have creationism next to your name.

They

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

bring that up, Matt? A. Q. A. Q. P-641? Right. Okay. All right. Now you actually looked at a copy of

came -- they were produced later in the course of the litigation, you know that, right? A. Q. A. yes. Q. Yes, they were produced after your deposition on P-21? And P-25? Oh, the ones you just -- oh, okay, the retreat,

that document earlier in your direct examination without the handwriting on it, isn't that right? A. Q. Yes. Now the handwriting, if you look on the

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

April the 13th, so we couldn't show them to you on that date, right? A. Q. Yes. And your deposition also occurred -- your

right-hand side, are two-thirds of the way up or maybe just a little more than two-thirds of the way up, it has handwritten, Alan. Am history. Founding fathers. And then there's an Would

deposition was on, excuse me, the board retreat in March of 2003 was actually on March the 26th, right? see that by looking at P-25? A. Q. A. Q. March 26th? Right. Yes. And that was less than a week before the date of We can

50/50 evolution versus creationism.

arrow that says, does not believe in evolution. you agree that's what that handwriting says? A. Q. Yes, it does. So I've asked you to look at these various

documents, because we didn't have them when we took your deposition on April the 13th. Now looking at these

the Trudy Peterman memo, which was April 1, right? A. Q. A. Q. Okay. Isn't that correct? April 1st, that would be correct. And your deposition was taken before Mrs. Can you

documents, can you tell us, were you the board member who wanted to teach evolution, 50/50 evolution, creationism, in or around March of 2003? A. Q. No, I don't believe I am. In fact, to the best of your recollection, you've

Callahan located what has been marked as P-641.

25

never talked about creationism at any school board

53

54

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

meeting, isn't that correct? A. Any school board meeting? I don't recall it

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 The thing 22 23 24 25

about my recollection. recollection of it. administrators. Q.

Mrs. Callahan didn't have a

Mrs. Brown, Mr. Brown, the So --

being discussed.

You're talking -- and you're saying,

The same thing.

never said the word in a board meeting or -Q. A. Q. Yes. I just don't recall it in a board meeting. When we asked you about this at your deposition,

Well, you didn't bring those documents forward You didn't find those?

personally, did you? A. Q. A. Q. No.

Dr. Nilsen found those, correct? Correct. He gave them to your counsel, who turned them

you said you never talked about creationism at any school board meeting. A. Q. A. Q. Okay. Is that correct? That sounds correct. That's what you told us when we asked you this at You never said creationism at any Do you remember that?

over to us? A. Q. That's correct. Now let's talk for just a few minutes about Creationism is your personal belief,

creationism. right? A.

your deposition.

school board meeting? A. Q. Okay. Now if these two documents that we've looked at,

Yes -- well, you want to give me a definition

before I say yes? Q. Well, we asked you this at your deposition, and

the board retreat documents showing the word creationism next to your name in 2002 and 2003, if they hadn't turned up, we would never have learned from you that you had brought up creationism, isn't that correct? A. That is -- I guess that would be true.

you said that your creationism was your personal belief, isn't that correct? minute. A. Well, that's what I said. I mean, again, I We'll talk about what it means in a

believe I've also said that everybody's definition of creationism could be different. Q. Well, we're interested in your definition of You believe in creationism, don't you?

is about that, you're asking me about my recollection. I believe, number 1, is, we brought these papers forward. And that basically, you know, you're asking me

creationism.

55

56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. Q. A. Q.

My faith? Yes. Yes. And that actually is based on the Bible, on Holy

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 It is my belief. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. Q. A. Q. scales? A. Q. A. Q.

Yes. And that's your personal religious belief? Yes. And that fish were formed with their fins and

Scripture, isn't that correct? A. Q. Yes. And one aspect of creationism is that species

That would probably be true. Again, that is your personal religious belief? Yes. And that humans -- and it's also your personal

exist -- excuse me -- is that species were formed as they now exist, isn't that right? A. Q. I believe so. And that species, including man, do not share That's one aspect of creationism, as

religious belief that humans -- I would say man, but that's not politically correct anymore -- that humans were formed, were created in their present form, right? That's part of your definition of creationism? A. Q. Yes. Again, that's, with all respect, your personal

common ancestors? you understand it? A. Q.

As I understand it.

And that means that birds were formed with their

feathers, beaks, and wings, correct? A. Well, that's not in the first parts of Genesis,

religious belief? A. Q. A. Q. Uh-huh. I'm sorry. Yes. You need to say yes or no.

but, okay. Q. Well, I recognize that's not in the first parts

I'm sorry.

of Genesis, but that is part of what you understand to be creationism, correct? A. Q. That the animals were formed, yes. Well, including specifically birds with their

And as part of that, it's part of your personal

religious belief that humans did not evolve from any other species, correct? A. Q. My religious belief, yes. Now -- and all of those things that we just

feathers, beaks, and wings, that they were formed that way, correct?

discussed are aspects of creationism, correct?

57

58

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. Q.

Okay, yes. Now some people who believe in creationism think

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

A. Q.

I believe, in macro evolution, yes. And that specific aspect of the theory of

that the Earth is not billions of years old, but only thousands of years old. A. Q. Are you familiar with that?

evolution is offensive to your personal religious beliefs, isn't it, Mr. Bonsell? A. Offensive? I don't believe it -- I have my

There are some people that believe that, yes. And then other people who believe in creationism

beliefs. Q. Well, it's inconsistent with your personal

believe that the Earth is possibly billions of years old, right? A. Q. I guess there's all sorts of beliefs, yes. Well, specifically, we're talking about beliefs I'd like to know, what's your personal

religious beliefs? A. Q. It's inconsistent. Now, Mr. Bonsell, do you believe that evolution

in creationism.

is atheistic? A. Q. Not necessarily. Well, take a moment to look at what has been Matt, would you please bring that up,

religious belief on that subject? A. I don't believe that the Earth is billions of As far as exact time, I can't really say.

years old. Q. old? A. Q. belief? A. Q.

marked as P-127. second page? A. Q. A. Q. 127? Correct.

Do you believe that it's only thousands of years

I would say, thousands and not billions. Just to be clear, that's your personal religious

17 18 19

I don't think that's in my book. You know, gosh, it didn't make it into the book.

Yes, yes. Now the theory of evolution teaches, among other

20 21 22 23 24 25

I can get you a copy of it or you can look on the screen. A. here. Q. I'm trying to look. He blew it up a little bit

things, that humans evolved from another species, a lower form of life, and that humans and other species share a common ancestor. You understand that, that is

I should be able to read it. Yes. Actually, I want to look at the -- P-127,

one of the things that the theory of evolution teaches?

this document that we're looking at, this is the

59

60

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

February newsletter that the school board sent out? A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. Okay. You put together some frequently asked questions? Okay. Isn't that right? Yes, uh-huh. You had assistance from the people from the Do you remember that?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. Q.

Yes, I do. Now are you trying to convey, that P-127, that

passage I just read, trying to convey that evolution has anti-religious implications? A. Not necessarily. We were basically responding to

what we were hearing out in the public and trying to respond to different things along that line. saying it was religious implications of ID. one of the main thrusts of the whole thing. Q. I guess what I'd like to know is this. This We were That was

Thomas More Law Center in putting this together? A. Q. Yes. Now if you go to what we're just looking at, that

one particular frequently asked question, quotes, Are there religious implications to the theory of ID, end quotes. A. Q. A. Q. Do you see that? Yes. And ID is intelligent design? Yes, it is. And it says, and I'd like to read it to you, Not

is -- not I guess what I'd like to know, I know this is what I'd like to know. Do you agree with me that the

theory of evolution is religiously neutral, it doesn't have any implications for the existence of God or any other deity? It doesn't suggest the non-existence of It is religiously neutral. Do

God or any other deity. you agree? A. Q. No.

any more so than the religious implications of Darwinism. Some have said that, before Darwin, we Biology took

You don't agree that evolution is religiously You think it has religious implications?

thought a benevolent God has created us.

neutral? A. Darwin. Q.

away our status as made in the image of God or man is the result of a purposeless process that did not have him in mind. He was not planned. Or Darwinism made it Do

You could have religious implications with

Sure.

Well, somebody could draw implications

possible to be an intellectually fulfilled aethiest. you see that?

from anything, but I'm asking you, is standing alone, is it your understanding that the theory of evolution has

61

62

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

no religious or anti-religious implications one way or another? A. Do you agree with me on that?

1 2 3 4

remember that? A. Q. In my mind? I guess I could say yes to that.

No, it doesn't have anymore religious

Did you want to do something to present or teach

implications than ID. Q. We're not talking about ID right now. We can

or somehow address or involve creationism in the Dover public schools? A. I have never brought anything forward to put

5 6 7 8 9 10 11

talk about that later perhaps. evolution.

We're talking about

I just want to know if you agree that

creationism into the school district in any way, shape, or form. Q. I'm asking you, not what you did, but I'm asking

evolution has no religious implications? A. Q. No, I don't agree with that. So you think evolution does have religion

you what you thought because -A. Q. A. What I thought? Yes. Did you ever think that? Did I ever think about it? Did I

implications? A. It could have religious implications. I mean,

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

scientists that I've heard here are saying that there's religious implications in every theory. agree that it's neutral. Q. Now, before you said that at some level you had So, no, I don't

I don't know.

ever think about it?

I think about a lot of things.

Did I ever think about it? Q. Let me ask you the question again, Mr. Bonsell.

an interest in creationism in the Dover public schools, isn't -- do you remember that testimony? A. Q. I'm sorry. Repeat that.

We've seen two documents that have your name and the word creationism next to them, and you agree that you are sure you said them? A. Q. In that with respect, I guess I would say, yes. But you don't remember saying it, and so you --

Before, we were asking about, talking about your,

the statement, your counsel's opening statement about your interests in creationism, and you, I believe, agreed with me that, at some level, in your mind, perhaps not expressed, you had an interest in creationism in the Dover public schools. Do you

obviously, it was there, you obviously said it, but you can't remember anything, but what you said about it, and I'm asking you now if you remember that you wanted to, you have no recollection of expressing it, but that you

63

64

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

wanted to somehow bring creationism or address creationism in the Dover public schools? A. No, not in that respect, no. I mean, obviously,

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Q.

Right.

And I'd like to show you -- Matt, if you And Mr. -- I want to ask Let me get you a

could please bring up P-11.

you a couple questions about Pandas. copy of it.

I said it at two board -- said the word at two board retreats so, obviously, I must have had the word in my head when I said it, as far as that goes. brought anything forward about it at all. Q. And again, I'm just, you don't even have any But I never

Mr. Bonsell, I've just given you a copy of

the book Of Pandas and People, and it's been marked as P-11. And I'd like you to go to pages 99 and 100 of this textbook, which you've been in court for much of the trial, haven't you? A. Q. A lot of it, yes. Matt, could you bring up -- and actually, we've

recollection of a thought process about doing something within the Dover schools, correct? A. Q. Not that I recall. You testified before in your direct that, in your

highlighted the language that I want you to look at on page 99 and 100. And it's highlighted on your screen.

view, intelligent design is not creationism? A. Q. Absolutely. And Pandas, the book Of Pandas and People is the

It says that, quote, Intelligent design means that various forms of life began abruptly through an intelligent agency, with their distinctive features already intact, fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers, beaks, and wings, etc. A. Q. I see that, yes. Now would you agree with me that, that's the same Do you see that?

reference source for information about intelligent design for students in the Dover High School, at least according to the board's resolution? A. Q. right? A. Q. School? A. If they want to look at it. Yes. And it's for the students in the Dover High It's a reference book. It's the reference book on intelligent design,

or at least very similar to what you said was one aspect of creationism? A. It's very similar, but I also have an

22 23 24 25

understanding from Dr. Behe that he didn't think that was -- that should have been in there.

65

66

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q.

Now I'd like you to look at the same document, P Matt, could you please bring that up? It's the

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

you're talking about?

Or can you give me exactly what,

-- page 156.

you know, what it is that I'm supposed to be agreeing to here? Q. Sure. I'm asking you, Pandas questions the That's

It's on the left column in the middle.

paragraph that begins, This is precisely why a book that questions -- Mr. Bonsell, I'd like you -- do you have that page in front of you? A. Q. I have it on the screen there, yes. I'd like to read this paragraph to you. It says,

notion of common descent, isn't that correct? one of the things that Pandas does? A.

Well, again, my understanding from listening to

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Dr. Behe, that there's, you know, he doesn't have a problem with common descent, from what I understood. So

quote, This is precisely why a book that questions the Darwinian notion of common descent is so necessary. By

I think this could be -- maybe there's some that do and some that don't. Q. I understand that. But I'm asking you if it's

presenting a reasonable alternative to evolution in the second sense; i.e., common ancestry, Pandas helps students learn to work with multiple perspectives to distinguish those perspectives from facts and to guard themselves against the illusion of knowledge. see that? A. Q. Yes, I do. And that's consistent with your personal Do you

your understanding that the book, Pandas and People, the reference source on intelligent design that's provided to students in the Dover High School, questions the notion of common descent? A. Well, that, I'm not sure of, because I don't

really see that in that sentence saying that -- it says there's a reasonable alternative, but it doesn't say what that is, so I don't know if it's something that could be part of that or not part of it or what. can't really answer yes or no to that. Q. Well, actually, I'm looking at the first So I

religious belief that doesn't believe in common ancestry as taught in the theory of evolution, isn't that correct? A. It really didn't go into what the alternative is They're saying, by

here in this sentence though.

presenting a reasonable alternative to evolution in the second sense; i.e., common ancestry. Is that what

sentence, the words that say, A book that questions the Darwinian notion of common descent. Do you see that?

67

68

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. Q.

Questions the notion, okay. Right. That's clearly referring to the book in

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Yes. 11 12 13 14 It's also on the 15 16

features outlined above. A. Q. I see that, yes.

Do you see that?

question, to Pandas, correct? A. Q. Yes. My question is simply, you agree that the book

I didn't need to read the last sentence.

But I

guess what I'm asking you is that, Pandas, to your knowledge, takes no position on the age of the Earth, correct? A. I didn't read it cover to cover, but if that's

Pandas, not Dr. Behe, but the book Pandas questions the notion of common descent? A. Q. That's what it says there. Again, that's consistent with your religious

what you're telling me, yeah, I'll agree with you. Q. I'm asking you if that's your understanding, that

personal beliefs? A. Q. Questions the notion of common descent?

the book Of Pandas and People doesn't take any issue with the age of the Earth? way or the other? A. Q. I'm not sure. Okay. But in any event, the -- this paragraph It doesn't address it one

Now I'd like to ask you to look at page 92 of

Pandas, the last paragraph in the right column? A. Q. screen. A. Q. That's even bigger, so it's good. It says, An additional issue concerns the matter While design proponents are in 92. Tell me when you've got that.

that we're looking at right here says that proponents of intelligent design have different views on the age of the Earth, as I just read, correct? A. Q. Yes. And that's consistent with your personal

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

of the Earth's age.

agreement on the significant observations about the fossil record, they are divided on the issue of the Earth's age. Some take the view that the Earth's

religious beliefs as well? A. Well, I believe that what it says is that, some

might agree with what I'm saying or what I believe and some don't that are in that design proponent. So I

history can be compressed into a framework of thousands of years, while others adhere to the standard old-earth chronology. In this chapter, we will examine the three

don't think that's -- I would then have to say, no, that isn't correct.

69

70

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q.

Well, you would agree that it's not inconsistent

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

by William Dembski. A. Q. Yes.

Do you remember that?

with your personal religious beliefs? A. Well, yes, it would be, because there is -So, yes, I would say that

Did you read Intelligent Design, The Bridge

they're divided on the issue. is an inconsistency. Q.

Between Science and Theology by William Dembski with a forward by Michael Behe? A. Q. Can I see that? Sure. MR. HARVEY: THE COURT: THE WITNESS: BY MR. HARVEY: Q. A. You don't think you read that book? The cover doesn't look familiar, no. They said May I approach, Your Honor? You may. This doesn't look familiar.

So to the extent that Of Pandas and People

teaches that the Earth is really billions of years old and not thousands of years old, that's inconsistent with your personal religious beliefs? A. Yes. THE COURT: Mr. Harvey, wherever you see a

11 12 13 14

logical break point, we can take a break. MR. HARVEY: I just concluded a section,

Your Honor, so this will be perfect right now. THE COURT: That's what I thought. We'll

Dembski. book.

I believe -- I don't know if I read the whole

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Just bits -- I mean, parts of the book of a

take a 20 minute recess, and then we'll return with your cross examination at that point after the recess. (Whereupon, a recess was taken at 2:53 p.m. and proceedings reconvened at 3:15 p.m.) THE COURT: All right. Mr. Harvey, you may

Dembski book. Q. Did you ever read a book in which Mr. Dembski

said that, quotes, Any view of the sciences that leaves Christ out of the picture must be seen as fundamentally deficient? A. No. I remember the bit -- what I can remember, I

resume your cross examination. CROSS EXAMINATION (CONTINUED) BY MR. HARVEY: Q. Mr. Bonsell, at your deposition, you told us that

believe, of his book, he was talking about how the scientists were treated that had any other view outside of Darwin's view, how the scientific community treated them, their own friends treated them, how they were

you had either read a book or parts of a book or books

71

72

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

basically ex-communicated.

People that were friends of

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

time the head of the curriculum committee, had advocated at a public meeting in June of 2004 or had said at a public meeting in June of 2004 that he was concerned that the Miller Levine textbook recommended by the teachers and administration was laced with Darwinism? A. Q. Which meeting was that? Any meeting. That it was reported in the June --

his, they wouldn't even look at him anymore. Q. Well, there's another volume called, It's Mere It's

Creation, Science, Faith, and Intelligent Design. a correction of essays edited by Mr. Dembski with

contributions by Michael Behe and Phillip Johnson, among others. you read? A. No, that doesn't look familiar either or sound Is that the book that you are referring to that

in the York papers in June of 2004, that Mr. Buckingham had said that? A. It sounds -- I testified that I remembered

familiar. Q. Now putting aside books and talking about

hearing him say that, yes. Q. Well, putting aside whether you remembered I know you testified that you heard him

newspapers, you testified that you read the York Dispatch. You have that actually delivered to your

hearing him.

home, correct? A. Q. Yes. And you, many days, read the York Daily Record as

say that, but I just want to know, that was reported in the papers, correct? A. Q. Could you show me what you're talking about? Sure. Take a look at has been marked as P-44. Then if you go to the

well, correct? A. Q. A. Q. Yes. And that was true in June of 2004? It probably was, yes. And at your deposition, you told us that you had

Do you have that in front of you? second page, fourth paragraph? A. Q. Second page?

Yes, the second page of P-44.

Matt, would you It says that,

read many of the news reports in this case? A. Q. Many of them. I mean, there's been a lot.

please bring up the fourth paragraph?

quotes, Buckingham said, although the book has been available for review since May 20003, he had just recently reviewed the book himself and was disturbed the

Do you recall that in June of 2004, the York

papers reported that Mr. Buckingham, who was at that

73

74

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

book was laced with Darwinism. A. Q. Okay. I read that. Okay.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Can you show it to 17 18

first page, fifth paragraph, second line -- second sentence. I'm sorry. Can you highlight that, Matt? Do you see that?

I just want to know, you knew that was reported

Beginning, Buckingham said.

in the York papers in June of 2004? A. Q. A. Q. Okay. Right? That's what it says, yes. Okay. And you knew that in June of 2004, the

Buckingham said the committee would look for a book that presented both creationism and evolution? A. Q. I see it. You knew that was reported in the papers, in the

York papers in June of 2004? A. Q. A. Q. I mean, I see it here, yes. Well, you got the York Dispatch, didn't you? Sure. I mean, there's other York papers that reported.

York papers reported that Mr. Buckingham had said that the committee, that's the curriculum committee, would look for a book that presented both creationism and evolution? A. Q. I don't recall that. Okay. And I'm not asking you whether you recall I'm asking you if you knew that that was

Do we need to look at those or do you remember that you read that? A. I'm just saying, I don't remember off the top of

it being said.

reported in the papers at the time? A. me? Q. Sure. Why don't you -- Matt, will you please You can either look on the screen or P-45 is a June 9th article Right here at this moment?

my head reading every report that was made by a newspaper report for, you know. to see it. yes. Q. A. Q. P-46. You believe you saw that in June of 2004? Probably. Well, just to make sure, let's take a look at Right. That's also an article dated June the So that's why I'd have

I mean, yes -- I mean, that's what it says,

19 20 21 22 23 24 25

bring up P-45?

look in your book at P-45.

from the York Dispatch written by Heidi Bernhard-Bubb. Do you see that? A. Q. Yes, I do. And if you go to the second page -- I'm sorry,

9th, 2004, except this is from the York Daily Record, and it's written by Mr. Maldonado. Fifth paragraph.

75

76

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Matt, could you highlight that, please?

It says that,

1 2 3 4

June of 2004, that the York papers were reporting that the board or some board members wanted creationism? A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. That's what they're reporting, yes. You knew that in June of 2004? Okay. Is that right? Obviously, yes. Okay. And now did you know in June of 2004, that

Buckingham and other board members are looking for a book that teaches creationism and evolution. that? A. Q. A. Q. I see it. Okay. Yes. And you knew that was -- I guess I'm just asking Do you see

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

you to remember that you knew that was reported in the York papers in June of 2004? A. Q. Okay. All right.

the York papers had reported that Mr. Buckingham had said at a public board meeting, 2000 years ago, a man died on a cross, can't someone take a stand for him, or words to that effect? A. Q. A. Q. I believe something along those lines, yes. That was reported in the York paper? That was reported, yes. And did you know that, do you remember that in

Do you remember that, that it was reported in the

York papers? A. Well, again, I can't say I recall every article

that was written in both papers and the Sunday paper and everything that I see. I don't remember exactly word

for word what was said, but I see that there was one on June 9th, and I agree with that, that was reported. Q. A. Q. We can look at other articles. No. There's no question that you knew in June -THE COURT: proceed. BY MR. HARVEY: Q. Mr. Bonsell, just more generally, you knew, in Hang on, please. You may

June of 2004, it was reported in the York papers that Mr. Buckingham had also said, this country wasn't founded on Muslim beliefs or evolution, it was founded on Christianity, and our children should be taught as such, or words to that effect? A. Q. Probably, yes. Was that at a board meeting?

I don't know whether -- I mean, I don't know

whether it was at a board meeting or not, but it was reported that Mr. Buckingham had said that publicly?

77

78

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. you. Q.

Okay. Did you know that? Probably. Do you want to take a look at an article? Well, that's fine. Go to P-47? If you are saying they reported it, I believe

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Q.

Well, take a look at what's been marked again, Are you at P-45?

back to P-45. A. Q. Okay.

It's the seventh paragraph, begins with the

words, Robert Boston? A. Q. Yes, I see that, yes. It says, Robert Boston, spokesman for Americans

United for Separation of Church and State, said the district will be inviting a lawsuit if it chooses a textbook that teaches creationism. was reported in June of 2004? A. Q. A. Q. Okay. Was that a yes? I mean, it definitely was reported, yes. If you look at P-54 -- well, yeah, if you look at Do you remember that

Okay.

That's all I'm -- I'm just getting to

9 10 11

confirm that you knew that was reported in June of 2004, right? A. Q. Sure. All right. Now did you know that in June of

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

2004, the York papers reported that a group called the Americans -- called Americans United for Separation of Church and State was considering legal action against the board if it chose a textbook that included creationism? A. The question is whether they reported that or

P-54, second page, tenth paragraph, again, beginning with Robert Boston. you're there. Are you at that -- tell me when

It says, Robert Boston, spokesman for

Americans United for Separation of Church and State, has said that the district will be inviting a lawsuit if it chooses a textbook that teaches creationism. And then it goes on to say that, Buckingham said he did not believe the members of the Americans United know what it means to be American. A. Yes, I do. Do you see that?

whether it happened? Q. Well, did you know in June of 2004 that the

Americans United for Separation of Church and State -A. I don't recall. That, I don't recall if they did

in June.

I know that name came up somewhere along the

line in 2004.

79

80

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q.

I'm just trying to get you to remember that in

1 2 3 4 5 6

Q.

But you never, with respect to any specific

June of 2004, you knew that Americans United for Separation of Church and State were talking about bringing a lawsuit against the board if it talked -- if it was going to teach or select a textbook that included creationism. A. Do you remember that? I didn't remember.

statement, asked the press -- told the press, the York papers or the reporters, that something was inaccurate? A. Well, if I was reporting about inaccuracies in

the press at the second board meeting in June, it would have had to do with the first board meeting in June, which is what this is talking about. Q. You never said anything specific to any members

I see it, that was printed.

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

You know, I don't remember exact dates, but this is from that time period, so I say, yes, I see it here. Q. Now you never put anything in writing to any of

of the press, the York papers or the reporters? A. asking. Q. You never said anything either, that specifically I didn't write anything, if that's what you're

the newspapers in June of 2004 or afterwards to say that anything they reported was incorrect, isn't that true? A. I'm not sure if I ever put anything in writing to

you said that -A. Well, I might -- I can't sit here and say, yes, But I'm saying

newspapers saying they were inaccurate. Q. Fair enough. And, in fact, you didn't ask the

that is specifically what I said.

reporters of the newspapers themselves to correct any statements that were reported about the board meetings in June of 2004, did you? A. I'm not sure if I don't recall in the second

inaccuracies at a board meeting, that's probably a pretty good indication. Q. Mr. Bonsell, you need to let me finish my

question -A. Q. I'm sorry, I'm sorry. -- before you start answering. You did it again.

meeting saying about inaccuracies in the press at the board meeting. Q. So you may have said something about inaccuracies

Just be careful about that.

I guess -- I'm just trying

in the press at a board meeting? A. I don't remember exact words, but it's -- that's

to establish that you never went to the papers and said that anything specific was inaccurate in any way? never said that, isn't that correct? You

what I am thinking, yes.

81

82

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A.

I don't -- I never went to anybody or said Is that what you're asking?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

that any specific statement was inaccurate, isn't that true? A. didn't. Q. Well, you certainly have no memory of doing that. I can't remember that, so I can't say, no, I

anything to anybody? Q.

You never went to the papers or the reporters

about the coverage in June of 2004 -- again, you need to let me finish -- about the coverage in June of 2004 and said, this statement is incorrect or that statement is incorrect or there's something specific in there that's incorrect, did you? A. Again, I believe I had talked about inaccuracies,

That would be a fair statement, wouldn't it? A. The thing is that, it sort of all goes together

because I was saying things to reporters, especially Joe Maldonado, all the time, at board meetings, after board meetings. I talked to him on the phone. I talked to,

but I don't have specific exactly, because I just don't remember from June of 2004 exactly what I said. But

like I said, numerous editors. them a letter.

But I've never written

obviously, when we started talking about intelligent design and the words started to be interchanged, this would be a clear example of that. But I can't sit here honestly and say, yes, absolutely, that's what I talked about. But this would

So, I mean, the thing is, if I was going to write every time that the media had put in something that wasn't correct, I wouldn't get anything else done. Q. I understand your testimony on that point, Mr. I'm just asking you to confirm for me that you

clearly indicate that that's probably what I was talking about. Q. But you don't have any memory of saying to the

Bonsell.

have no memory of ever going to the York papers or their news reporters with respect to anything that was reported in June of 2004 and saying, that statement is wrong, or anything specific in there is incorrect, isn't that true? A. I guess not -- if you're asking me specifically,

19 20 21 22 23 24 25

members of the press that any specific statement or anything specifically that was reported was inaccurate? That's all I'm asking you to agree with me on. true, isn't it? A. Q. Again, can you say that one more time, please? You never said to anybody with the York papers That's

absolutely, that I said that, then I would have to say, no, I don't.

83

84

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q. A.

You didn't -- you never did that, correct? I'm not saying that. I'm saying, you're asking No, But

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

specific that was reported about what happened in the June meeting? Did you say that, this statement, Did you ever say

me if I have a recollection of that specific thing. I don't have a recollection of that specific thing. like I said before, because of what I said at other

creationism was discussed, is wrong?

that to anybody in any public forum that the newspapers had got that wrong? A. I'm sure at some point I had said about using the But like

meetings, it would lead me to believe that this possibly could be one of the reasons. question, absolutely, no. Q. Well, can you point to anywhere where you made or But going back to your

word creationism for intelligent design.

again, I can't sit here and tell you what specific date that I would have said that or if I said it, because more than likely, I said it more than once. But I'm

any board member or the administration made a public statement that, what was reported in the York papers in June of 2004 was incorrect? A. I -- do you want a specific date? I can't give

sorry, I can't answer your question as a specific date. I just can't give that to you. Q. Well, it's not -- it's more than a specific date.

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

you a specific dates. done at board meetings.

But I can tell you that it was I, sitting in that chair, have

You can't even remember what you said specifically, correct? A. I'm sure I would have said something along the

specifically said that there are things that were not reported correctly. I mean, so -- I know I've done it.

lines of, the teaching, we're not teaching, because I said that over and over again. We're making kids aware.

But if you're asking me specifically, that, I can't -- I didn't write it down, which dates I said that, because it was an ongoing thing. it to them after the meeting. Sometimes I said

I'm sure that when they say creationism, it's not creationism, because if I said that once, that intelligent design is not creationism, I said it a hundred thousand times, that it's not creationism. So, I mean, I said that in board meetings, out of board meetings. the time. So, but again, I mean, I said it all

Sometimes I said it to So, I mean, I

them when I was sitting behind the table. can't tell you specifically. Q.

Well, did you -- going back to where we were just Did you do that with respect to anything

a minute ago.

85

86

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q.

What about Mr. Buckingham's comment that was

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

P-60.

Could you please bring that up, Matt?

We've got

reported, 2000 years ago, a man died on a cross, can't someone take a stand for him? Did you or any other

it blown up on the screen, if that's helpful, too. A. Q. A. Oh, okay. Thank you.

board member ever say in any public forum that that was not said? A. that. I think, in my deposition, I remember him saying But I think it was at a different time period.

Have you seen this before? I think I saw it the other day when I was here at

the hearing. Q. This is a letter, according to Mrs. Geesey, that

So I wouldn't say he didn't say it, because I remember, but I think it was a different time period. Q. Well, you told us -- that's your testimony, that

she wrote, and that was published in the York Sunday News on June the 27th of 2004? A. Q. A. Q. Okay. Right? All right. And in here, she is responding to some of the

it was said at a different time period, it was said in November 2003, it wasn't said in June 2004. testimony on that? A. Q. I believe that's what I had said before, yes. All right. But my question -- and you told us That's your

things that are being said and reported in the papers, correct? A. I guess so. I believe that's what she had said,

that, as you say, at your deposition? A. Q. I believe that was. But did you ever say it to any -- did you or any

that she was responding to somebody's letter. Q. And the question is, you're not aware of any

board member of the administration say it before then, that that was something that was inaccurate, that wasn't right in the press? A. Q. I don't recall. Now the only statement in writing in response to

board member or the administration ever responding in writing to anything that was said in the press other than this letter, correct? A. I mean, about that particular board meeting?

There again, I'm saying, if you're asking me, absolutely specifically on something, I'd have to say, no. did it happen? It happened all the time. Yes. When But it

what was reported in the press is Mrs. Geesey's letter to the editor of June the 27th, which has been marked as

87

88

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

wasn't in writing. Q. Okay. Fair enough. So it's your testimony then

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

remember it from the other day. Q. Please bring up what's been marked as P-56. And

that, other than this letter by -- to the editor by Mrs. Geesey, no board member of the administration ever put in writing that they disputed anything that was reported in the York papers in June of 2004, correct? A. Well, yeah. In writing -- well, I shouldn't I don't know. I don't know. I mean, I'm There could have

you can turn to it in your notebook as well. A. Q. A. Q. P-56? Yes. Yes. All right. You've had a chance to review that,

speak for everybody. speaking for myself. been others. Q.

haven't you? A. Q. Yes. Now this is a letter from Beth Eveland, one of

I just don't know.

So you don't know of any except Mrs. Geesey's

the Plaintiffs in this lawsuit? A. Q. Yes. And it was published in the York Sunday News on

letter in which she talks about creationism, right? A. I don't think -- she's responding to somebody

writing, or another editorial letter, isn't she? Q. A. Yes, she is. She's responding to an editorial letter not about

June the 20th of 2004? A. Q. A. Q. Okay. Right? Yes. And in it, she's saying that she was very upset

a board meeting, about an editorial letter, correct? Q. A. said. Q. We can take a look at it, if you want. No, I'm just asking. I thought that's what you

about something she read in Wednesday's York Daily Record, and the specific thing she mentions is the York Daily Record's report that Mr. Buckingham had said, this country wasn't founded on Muslim beliefs or evolution, this country was founded on Christianity, and our students should be taught as such. A. Correct?

This is a response to an editorial. It was in response to something that was said in

the papers? A. Q. A. Yeah, in the papers. Why don't we take a look at that? Okay. Because I thought it was -- yeah, I

That's what she says here, yes.

89

90

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q.

And then Mrs. Geesey, if you go back to P-60 for All right. Can

1 2 3 4 5

A. Q.

That and the interim one that was before this. Well, this says, the interim one was on October

just a minute, is responding to this.

you see in the first paragraph, she refers to Ms. -- to Beth Eveland? A. Q. Yes. Okay. We're making this more complicated than it All I'm saying is, other than Ms. Geesey's

19th, correct? A. one. Q. A. I believe they're exactly the same, correct? No, the smaller, little, the little one that was I'm not sure of the date. It was before this

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

needs to be.

letter to the editor on June the 27th of 2004, in which she refers to creationism, you're not aware of any board member or the administration putting in writing that they -- reacting or responding in any way to the reporting of the York papers in June of 2004? A. Am I aware of any writing? I would say, no, I'm

put on the website, that was put on our website. Q. Matt, if you would highlight the second paragraph This paragraph was the same both in the first

of this.

version of what was put in the press release and the second version of what was put in the press release in November, right? A. No. What I'm talking about, there's another

not aware of any writing. Q. Okay. And, in fact, the first time that the

smaller one that was one that we put out right after, I think, right after, before this one, the one that we had gone over earlier. MR. HARVEY: THE COURT: BY MR. HARVEY: Q. Are you referring to what has been marked as Can I approach, Your Honor? You may.

board or the administration put in writing that it disputed anything that was reported in June of 2004 was when it submitted its answer to the complaint in this litigation on January the 3rd, 2005, seven months later, isn't that right, Mr. Bonsell? A. No. I believe there was something -- we had put

those responses in the -- at the website. Q. You're referring to -- Matt, why don't you please This is the document you're referring

Defendants' Exhibit 83? A. Q. Yes. That's a memo from you to Mr. -- to Dr. Nilsen,

bring up P-104.

to that was put up on the website?

dated November the 12th of 2004?

91

92

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A.

Yes, that's a memo.

But I believe that was

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

A.

So there wouldn't be any reason to put that in

placed on -- I believe -- I'm pretty sure that was placed on the website, on our website. Q. A. Q. A. Please read it for us. Read it to you? Yeah, sure the substance of it. The Dover Area School District is in the process We

there unless there was a misunderstanding. Q. Well, you're not -- that doesn't say anything

about the fact that board members discussed creationism, as reported in the papers, right? A. But where did Mrs. Eveland get her -- she lived She didn't even live in

in York Township at the time. Dover. Q. A. I'm sorry?

of forming a fair and balanced science curriculum. are not, underlined, teaching religion. To keep our

residents informed and to clear up any misconception that they may have concerning this matter, in the next few weeks we'll be issuing an informational statement on this subject. Q. That was the first thing that you put in writing

I said, Mrs. Eveland, in this letter here, says

she lives in York Township. Q. What I'm saying to you is, your November the 12th

memo to Dr. Nilsen, which you say was put on the website, doesn't in any way say, the board didn't discuss creationism in June of 2004, as reported in the papers, does it? that? A. Well, it doesn't say that, but it says, we are If we would have been discussing It doesn't say that or anything like

on that subject, right? A. Probably -- after it was -- because this was This is after it was

before anything was ever passed. passed. Q. Sure.

And that's not referring to anything that

19 20 21

not teaching religion.

was inaccurate in the reporting in the York papers in June -A. Well, I think there's -- when you say, we are not

putting creationism in the schools and teaching it, then you would have been teaching religion. teaching religion. Q. That doesn't in any way -- Mr. Bonsell, that So we are not

22 23 24 25

teaching religion, that is in direct response to what has been said in the public up until that time. Q. Okay.

doesn't in any way respond to the very specific reports that were in the paper in June of 2004 about the board

93

94

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

discussing creationism, does it? A. Q. No. In that respect, no.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

the actual chronology of the district vows and curriculum development process and implementation, right? A. Q. Okay. And in that, you're suggesting that the media

It doesn't respond to the reports in the York

papers in June of 2004 that Mr. Buckingham had said at a public meeting, 2000 years ago, a man died on a cross, can't someone take a stand for him? It doesn't respond

reporting was incorrect, right? A. It says, Some statements and opinions from the

to that specifically in any way, does it? A. It doesn't respond to that specifically, but in

media, community members, and board members -statements and opinions from the community, media, community members, board members, which are completely inaccurate or false have been assumed to be official board policy. Q. Yes.

general, I believe it does. Q. And it doesn't respond specifically in any way to

the reports in the press that Mr. Buckingham had said in June of 2004 that, this country wasn't founded on Muslim beliefs or evolution, this country was founded on Christianity, and our children should be taught as such, right? it? A. Q. Specifically? No. It doesn't respond to that specifically, does

And that's five months after the reporting in the Five months later,

June York papers, right? approximately? A. Q. Yes.

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

And again, that doesn't say anything in there

And then if we look at your press release that

specifically in response to the reports that board members were discussing creationism or the other things that I mentioned to you just a minute ago, does it? A. Not specifically, but it does mention statements

came out on the 19th of November -- we've blown up the language there. There is reports -- there is something

in there that says, quotes, Some statements and opinions from the media, community members, and board members which are completely inaccurate or false have been assumed to be official district policy or curriculum procedure. And then it goes on to say, The following is

from the media. Q. Okay. And then, in fact, the first time that the

board or the school district or the administration in any way specifically disputed in writing what was

95

96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

published in the York papers in June was at the time of the answer, right? A. Q. At the time of the answer? Matt, can you bring up a side-by-side of

1 2 3 4 5 6

Q. A. Q.

Now you were deposed on January 3rd, 2003, right? Yes. And did you know, that's the same day that your

counsel submitted the answer in this case? A. Q. I don't recall that. And when you were deposed, you denied that

paragraph 29 of the complaint and paragraph 29 in the answer? MR. GILLEN: Your Honor, at this time I

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

creationism had been discussed at the June board meetings, right? A. Q. Do you remember that?

would respectfully interpose an objection on the theory that this examination is cumulative. Mr. Bonsell has He

Can you show me that? Sure. Please go to your January 3rd deposition, You were shown an article, and then

testified that he didn't put anything in writing. said that his complaints were verbal. over it numerous times now. the cumulative examination. elicited. MR. HARVEY:

And we're going

page 45, line 22.

I don't see the point of I think the point has been

Mr. Rothschild asked you the following question, and you gave the following answers: Quote, Does this article

accurately report that creationism was being debated at school board meetings? Answer, Absolutely not.

Your Honor, if either counsel

15 16 17 18 19 20 21

or the witness will agree with me that no one disputed those specific reports in the June York papers until the answer in this case on January 3rd, 2003, I'll move on. MR. GILLEN: Specifically in writing, he's

Question, There was no discussion about creationism? Answer, No. Question, So as we look

through these articles, this uninterrupted series of articles about June meetings that talk about creationism being debated at the school board meetings and statements made by school board members, including yourself, about creationism, all of those are just fabricated? Answer, Fabricated? Answer, Fabricated?

been asked that question several times, and he said he didn't put anything in writing. THE COURT: you move on. MR. HARVEY: BY MR. HARVEY: Okay. I take that as a yes. Why don't

22 23 24 25

Question, Yes, fabricated.

You mean, she just made them up -- all up, is that what

97

98

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

you mean?

Question, There are a lot of statements in I think Answer, All

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

A. Q. A. Q. A. Q.

Can you show me that? Do you remember your testimony? I would like to see it. Sure. Let's go to page 48 of your deposition.

here about people talking about creationism. you are suggesting to me it never happened.

this debate about creationism, yes, that never did happen. A. Q. It was not a debate about creationism. Okay. Then if you go over to page 48, line 19 to 22.

Same page, okay. Line 24. Question, If you could go down -- if

you could go to the next page of that article, four full paragraphs down, a statement is attributed to Mr. Buckingham, nearly 2000 years ago, someone died on a cross for us, shouldn't we have the courage to stand up for him? Did Mr. Buckingham make that statement? I'm not sure he said

Do you have that in front of you? A. Q. Page 48, 19, yes. Question, So you can't remember anything he said

about it, but you are sure all this discussion about creationism is just made up? that. said. That was your testimony, wasn't it? A. Q. Yes. So on January 1st, you told us that the Answer, I am sure about

Answer, I'm not sure he said that. that at this meeting.

I mean, you have to ask Mr. Buckingham what he

Question, Do you recall him saying, making that statement at any school board meeting? It is a pretty

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

powerful statement to say at a school board meeting. Answer, I don't think it has to do with what we are talking about, not. Question, Do you think he made that statement at a meeting? Answer, I'm not positive. I think he said

discussions, the reports in the paper about discussions of creationism were just made up, correct? A. Q. That's basically what I said. Okay. And also that day, you also said that you

something along those lines, but I don't believe it was -- it had to do with this. What do you believe it had

didn't know when Mr. Buckingham made the statement about, 2000 years ago, a man died on a cross, or at least you couldn't remember. testimony? Do you remember that

-- Question, What do you believe it had to do with? Answer, There was a year ago, before this, there was another discussion on the pledge, but this was the year

99

100

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

before. Question, You think he made a statement along those lines regarding the pledge? Answer, To be honest,

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Well, I'm not sure. The thing is, basically, on 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q.

All right.

So just to clarify.

At the time you

said, it was -- you thought that it was, it happened in 2003, but you weren't exactly sure, and today you're saying you're pretty sure it was said in 2003, not in June of 2004, right? A. Q. Yes, that -- that's basically, yes. Now let's talk about the October 18th board That's the meeting at which the

I'm not sure when he said it or if it is -- if this is exactly what he said. I'm just not sure.

Isn't that right? A. Q. Yes. And that day, you also said you weren't aware of

meeting, Mr. Bonsell.

Mr. Buckingham ever saying, this country wasn't founded on Muslim beliefs or evolution, right? A. Well, going back to this last thing, it says, I

board adopted the resolution that's at issue in this case? A. Q. Yes. Do you remember Heather Geesey stating at that

thought it was -- had a discussion to do with the pledge, which was a year before. So I believe that's

board meeting that somebody might be fired? A. Q. A. Yes. Tell us what you remember about that. What I can recall about that was is, there was

consistent with what I am, you know, thinking, you know, what I said now. Q. sure? A. Well, you also said then that you just weren't

talk about, I guess, a lawsuits, or something along those lines. And from our understanding was, is that There

something like this, this was January 3rd, you know, I come into a deposition like this. this whole thing. meetings. I've been reliving

what we were doing was legal per our attorney. was nothing unconstitutional about it.

I've been coming to almost all these

And she basically, I think -- somewhere in the conversation, she basically said, you know, well, more or less, they better be giving us right information, and if not, if we get sued, we should fire our attorney. Q. Right. And then the paper reported the next day

And some things, I mean, recollections do I mean, I wish everything But, I mean, this is

come back on some issues.

would come back, but it doesn't.

pretty much along the lines of what I'm saying now.

101

102

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

that Mrs. Geesey had said something about firing the teachers, right? A. Q. That wasn't correct. Right, but that's what the paper reported the

1 2 3 4 5

A.

To fire teachers at a board meeting?

Yeah, I

guess so. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. no. Q. That's right. That would be a very serious thing Well, if you are talking about firing teachers -You don't -- well -That's a pretty serious things? You don't make flip remarks like that, no. Excuse me? You wouldn't make a remark like that probably,

next day, right? A. Well, I believe so. If you can show it to me,

6 7 8

that's fine.

But I'll take your word for it, if that's

what you're saying. Q. Well, take a look at P-797. And Matt, if you

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

could please bring that up, the second full paragraph in the right-hand column. It's on the screen in front of It says, if they -- quotes,

if you said it, right? A. That would be a very serious thing? In what way

you as well, Mr. Bonsell.

If they requested Stock and Leader, they, the faculty, should be fired, said board member Heather Geesey. agreed to the book and the changes in curriculum. you see that? A. Q. I see it, yes. At least what the paper is saying is that Ms. That's They Do

do you mean? Q. If I was talking about -- if I was a board

member, and I was talking about firing teachers, that would be a very serious thing, isn't that true? A. Q. I would agree. And, in fact, Mrs. Geesey was very concerned

Geesey said the faculty should be fired, right? what the paper said, right? A. Q.

about this, this report in the paper, and she contacted Dr. Nilsen the very next day, didn't she? A. Q. I believe that's correct. And were you here for Dr. Nilsen's testimony on

That's what the paper said, but that's incorrect. Actually, if it were correct, and I'm not asking

you to agree that it's correct, but if it were correct, that would be a very serious thing for a board member to threaten to fire teachers at a board meeting, correct?

that point? A. I don't know if I -- I wasn't here for all of Dr.

Nilsen's testimony.

103

104

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q.

Matt, can you please pull up Dr. Nilsen's

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

the area of curriculum. A. Q. A. this. Q.

Did I read that correctly?

testimony on October the 20th in the afternoon, page 113. Mr. Bonsell, I actually have a copy of the

Yes, I believe you have. You were here for that testimony, weren't you? No. No, that's why I said, I don't remember

testimony, if it would be easier for you to read it? A. bit. Q. I think I can read it. He expanded it a little Thank you.

I believe I should be able to read it. All right.

Well, you know that's what happened, right, or at

Now if you look on line, it looks Did Mrs. Geesey ever ask you

least you know now? A. Q. I know now. Now as it turns out, we can't check to see what

like, 11.

Question, Okay.

to do anything as a result of the controversy surrounding her comment? Answer, Yes. The next

Mrs. Geesey actually said at that meeting because, according to Dr. Nilsen, that part of the tape -- that part of the meeting was not taped, right? A. Q. By accident, yes. And Dr. Nilsen testified that the tapes were only

morning, the paper reported that she had recommended firing the teachers. And she immediately contacted me and told me that she was -- that that was -- that that was obviously not what she had said, and I agreed with her, and she did two things. One, she sent me an e-mail explaining her position and asked me to forward that throughout all of the teachers, stating on her behalf that, or in her words, that that was not what she had intended and, in fact, that she liked all the teachers and supported the teachers. Secondly, to prove that that was not what she had said, she requested that I develop a verbatim transcript of the October 18 meeting concerning the issues of -- or

kept until the minutes were approved, do you remember that, or did you know that? A. I believe we had a letter from Denise Russell,

who was the business manager for 10 years, and basically said that's what was basically the policy. Q. That was your understanding. The board -- the

tapes of the board meetings were kept until the minutes were approved, right? A. Q. I believe so, yes. And actually, were you here for Mrs. Callahan's

testimony?

105

106

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. Q.

Some of it, I believe, yes. She testified that the -- she thought the tapes Do you remember that?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 You 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Matt, can you bring 21 22 23 24 25

A. Q.

That's what it says, yes. And under approval of minutes, it says, quote,

were kept for like six months. A.

Motion by Mrs. Harkins, seconded by Mr. Weinrich, that the school board approve the minutes of June 7, 2004, and June 14, 2004, motion adopted by a vote of nine yes, and zero no. A. Q. Do you see that?

Well, now that you say that, I believe she did

say that, but that's not -- that wasn't correct. Q. Right. It's your testimony, they were only kept

until the minutes were approved, right? A. Q. Up until the point of these lawsuits, yes. And that's always been your understanding.

Yes, I do. And that means then that the tapes for the board

meetings on June the 7th and June 14th would have been in existence, at least as of the date of these minutes, which is July the 12th, 2004? A. Q. It would appear that that would be the case. And if you or any other board member or the

don't agree with Mrs. Callahan, right? A. Well, we have a letter stating as such, that she

isn't correct, from Denise Miller, who has, unfortunately, passed away, but she was the business manager and board secretary from 1995 up until her time when she left the school district. Q. Do you know when the minutes of the June 7th and

administration had wanted to dispute anything that was reported in the York papers in June of 2004, as of July the 12th, you could have gone to the tapes and made a verbatim transcript to prove that you didn't say it, just like Mrs. Geesey did when she disagreed with something in the press, isn't that correct? A. Q. I guess you could have. Now you knew that this issue of what was said at

June 14th board meetings were approved? A. I'm not positive. Usually, it's the next, you

know, the next month.

But I'm not, you know -- I don't

know off the top of my head a date. Q. Let me show you the minutes.

up P-63, the minutes of the meeting on July the 12th. And I'll ask you to highlight the section on approval of minutes. P-63 is the minutes of the July 12th, 2004,

the board meetings was going to be an issue, at least as of August 27th, 2004, at the board curriculum meeting that date, right? A. The board curriculum meeting, yes.

board meeting, right, Mr. Bonsell?

107

108

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q. A.

Because -Well, that's when we met with the science

1 2 3

A. Q.

I must have. So you knew that these reports that had been in

teachers. Q. P-70. Right. Take a look at what's been marked as That's an e-mail from Steven

the papers was going to be a very serious matter for the board in this lawsuit, didn't you? A. Well, if that's what would happen, that we would

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Do you see that?

Russell, who is an attorney with Stock and Leader, to Dr. Nilsen, dated August the 26th, 2004? A. Q. Yes. And you received this e-mail at a curriculum

have to address it. Q. Now is it still your testimony that the

discussion of the creationism at the June board meetings was just made up by the local papers? A. Like I said before in my testimony, I don't

meeting on the 27th of August, 2004? A. Q. I believe. I'm not positive on that.

recall it being discussed, no. Q. Well, at your deposition, you said that it was

Were you here when Dr. Nilsen testified that you

did receive it? A. Q. No. Well, look at the bottom, the fourth sentence Matt,

just made up, right? A. up. Q. A. Q. A. Q. please. A. Q. 48, 19. Yes, I'm there. Should we go back there? Yeah, let's go back. Your January 3rd deposition, page 48? Page 48, okay. Lines 19 to 22. Tell me when you're there, I'm not sure if that's what I said, it was made

from the end and the third sentence from the end.

if you would highlight those beginning with the words, my concern for Dover. And that says, quotes, My concern

for Dover is that, in the last several years, there has been a lot of discussion, news print, etc., for putting religion back in the schools. In my mind, this would

add weight to a lawsuit seeking to enjoin whatever the practice might be, close quotes. A. Q. Yes, I do. You saw that on or around August the 27th, 2004? Do you see that?

The question was, So you can't remember anything

he said about it, but you are sure all this discussion about creationism is just made up? Answer, I am sure

109

110

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

about that. Do you see that? A. Q. Yes, I do. So is it still your testimony that the discussion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

years ago, a man died on a cross, can't someone take a stand for him, in June of 2004? A. I was here for that. I'm not exactly sure --

but, okay. Q. Do you remember that she -- do you remember that

of the reports about creationism in the York papers in June of 2004 was made up? A. I believe so, because that's when -- I believe

she testified that she had heard that in June of 2004? A. I don't remember her saying that, but if you're

the first meeting is when we started to discussing -- ID came up. Q. So you believe that two reporters who wrote the

saying that's what she said, okay. Q. A. Well, do you think -Like I said, I was here. I just don't remember

reports, Ms. Bernhard-Bubb and Mr. Maldonado, made it all up? A. words. Is that your testimony? Well, made up, maybe that's a -- but interchange I guess that could be the same thing as made up.

her -- that particular testimony. Q. Why would the press make up that statement and

claim that something that was said in November of 2003 was said in June of 2004? A. Q. A. Q. I don't know. Mrs. Spahr wouldn't lie about that, would she? I wouldn't say she would. If the news -- if the press is so prone to Why would they do that?

But, I mean, Mrs. Bubb and Mr. Maldonado usually sat together. Q. Were you here the other day when Mr. Baksa

testified, and he said he heard the word creationism at the June meetings? A. Q. No. If Mr. Baksa testified that he heard creationism

exaggerating or not getting it correct, then why do you keep making statements to them, including statements during the course of this lawsuit? A. In the course of this lawsuit? Basically in the

at the June board meetings, is he making it up, too? A. Q. No. Now were you here when Bertha Spahr testified

hopes that some of the truth will get out to what's going on, on our side. I mean, in the newspaper, in particular, I've

that she heard the word -- Mr. Buckingham say, 2000

111

112

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

noticed that, in one time in particular, I was just curious, and I measured -- you know, they did a whole report on one of the days of the trial. And they always

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. Q.

I believe it had to do with legal matters, yes. Now would you agree with me that, with the

exception of the presentation that was made to the board by the Discovery Institute, which was, as you say, legal, no one made any presentation to the board about intelligent design or the subject of the October 18th resolution? A. No one made a presentation about intelligent

say, you know, they say, oh, fair and balanced and all that. And I just -- I had to do that. I measured the lines of print that were on the subject. And I believe there was 40 inches of print And 37 and a half

about the day, the day's witness.

inches were the Plaintiffs' attorneys and 2 and a half inches were about our attorneys. Q. You don't deny that you and Mr. Thompson have

design, and what was the last section? Q. A. Q. Or the subject of the October 18th resolution? Or the subject -The October 18th resolution. Nobody came in and

been standing on the front of the courthouse steps making statements about this case, do you, Mr. Bonsell? A. Q. A. Q. I do that occasionally, yes. Now you're familiar with the Discovery Institute? Yes. And the Discovery Institute actually came to the

said, here's why you should -- made a presentation, and said, here's why you should pass this October 18th resolution? A. Q. Not that I recall, no. And you never, yourself, spoke to the board about

Dover School Board and made a presentation in executive session prior to the October 18th board meeting, isn't that correct? A. Q. Legal, yes. Right, but two gentlemen from the Discovery

why they should support the resolution, did you? A. Spoke to the board about it? I'm sure there was

a -- I'm sure there was discussions about it, but I don't know specifically, no. Q. Not specifically.

And you're not aware that anyone provided any

Institute in Seattle, Washington, came to the Dover School Board and made a legal presentation at some time prior to the October 18th board resolution, correct?

materials to the board about intelligent design to help them make their decision about the October 18th resolution, are you?

113

114

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. Q. A.

Any materials? Yes. I guess the discussions, and the book and the

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

you, you had been working on that subject for approximately six months, isn't that correct? A. Well, give or take -- I mean, it was a few months Well, it was four

videos were there. Q. You're not aware that any members, that they were

that we had been working on it, yes.

to six months, something along those lines. Q. A. Q. A. Q. Well, it included the June board meetings, right? Yeah. Yes? Yes. You testified in your direct examination that you

provided to the members of the board, were you? A. Q. A. Q. That, I don't know. They were generally available, correct? Yes. But you don't know that they were provided to the

board, right? A. I think they were made available, but you'd have I don't know.

had a meeting with the teachers in the fall of 2003? A. Q. Yes. And at that meeting, you learned that the biology

to ask each person if they looked at it. Q.

You're not aware that either you or any member of

teachers did not teach common ancestry in the Dover biology class in high school, correct? A. Q. They didn't teach macro evolution. Right. By that, you mean, they didn't teach

the board or the administration contacted the National Academy of Sciences or the American Association for the Advancement of Sciences or the American Biology -- the Federation of Biology Teachers or any other organization to find out about intelligent design or evolution in helping you make your decision on October 18th, isn't that correct? A. No, but I don't know if we've ever done that with

common ancestry? A. Q. I guess that's part of it. And, in fact, you learned that they only taught

evolution within a species or what you call micro evolution? A. Well, micro evolution, adaptation over time, that

any other form of curriculum either. Q. Now when you passed that resolution on October

type of thing, yes. Q. Change within a species?

18th, 2004, you had actually been working, according to

115

116

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A. Q.

Yes, you could say it that way. And that was good news for you, because you don't

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A.

I talked to numerous attorneys, because we had

offers from many attorneys. Q. And the board engaged Thomas More Law Center to

have any problem with teaching -- as a personal, as a matter of your personal religious beliefs, you don't have any problem with change within a species, do you? A. Q. No. And as we discussed earlier, macro evolution is

be its counsel in December of 2004, right? A. Q. I believe that's correct. You checked out the Thomas More Law Center on its

website, among other things, right? A. Q. And talked and spoken with them. You spoke with people from the Thomas More Law

inconsistent with your personal religious beliefs? A. Q. A. In which respect are you talking? Well, common ancestry? Common ancestry? (Witness nodded head

Center, right? A. Q. A. Q. Yes. You checked out their website? I believe so. Well, and you knew -- actually, you knew -I'm going to ask, please pull up P-134, Can you bring that up so we

affirmatively.) Q. The idea that one species, over a very long

period of time, could give rise to another species, that's inconsistent with your personal religious beliefs? A. Q. Yes. Dr. Nilsen testified that Mrs. Harkins designated

strike that.

and you can turn to that. can see it, Matt?

This is from the website of the

Thomas More Law Center, and it's printed out on December the 20th of 2004. Matt, if you can go to the right-hand corner so we can see that. Down in the lower right-hand corner,

you as the board member assigned to check out the Thomas More Law Center at the time that the board agreed to have the Thomas More Law Center as its counsel in this litigation. A. Q. No. Is it true that Mrs. Harkins assigned you to Were you here for that testimony?

it's a little cut off by the sticker, but you can see right there. A. Q. It says 12/20/2004. Do you see that?

I'm sorry? I'm just pointing out to you that this, which was

check out the Thomas More Law Center?

117

118

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

used at the depositions on January the 3rd of 2005, was actually printed off the website on December the 20th of 2004. So that would have been around the time that you

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

not proper to attempt to impugn, apparently, a client based on the work of the lawyer. I mean, certainly I know that I wouldn't do that with respect to the Plaintiffs based on their selection of counsel. And I fail to see how it's

were looking at the website, right? A. I guess that was a little after that time.

Somewhere in that, you know, within the month anyway. Q. Matt, could you please go back to the body of it

relevant or proper here. MR. HARVEY: Relationship with Mr. Gillen

and highlight the sentence that begins, our purpose. Let me read this to you. It says, Our purpose is to be

wouldn't impugn anyone, I believe. MR. GILLEN: MR. HARVEY: this witness with this. Thank you for that, Steve. Furthermore, I'm not impeaching I'm asking him if he knew this.

the sword and shield for people of faith, providing legal representation without charge to defend and protect Christians and their religious beliefs in the public square. A. Q. Do you see those words?

One of the central issues in this case is whether the board acted for a religious purpose. They have hired --

Yes, I do. And did you know that Thomas More called itself

or they have not hired, excuse me, apparently they're being represented for free by an organization that has, as its express and written mission, defending the views of the religious freedoms of Christians in the public square. And I'm just asking him if he knows that and if

the sword and shield for people of faith? A. Q. This is probably the first I've seen that per se. And would you agree with me that, in this case,

Thomas More is providing legal representation without charge to defend and protect Christians and their religious beliefs in the public square? MR. GILLEN: questions. I'm going to object to the But it

he believes that's what this case is about. THE COURT: I would say to Mr. Gillen,

despite the evident and appropriate cordial relationship and professional relationship that exists among counsel and with the Court, I don't view this as a personal question. I view it as an appropriate question. If he presses on this point, I might find

I mean, it's our mission statement.

seems to me, there's some sort of impeachment by counsel, which is improper. And insofar as I know, it's

119

120

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

that objectionable.

I think that question in the

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

(Whereupon, the court reporter read back the last question again.) THE WITNESS: Well, two answers to that.

context of this case is not objectionable, and I may not view it as you view it. I can understand why you would

view it that way as counsel and as a member of the Thomas More Law Center. So perhaps you don't have the objectivity that I have. I'll overrule the objection. I'll allow

One is, I didn't pick Thomas More or -- I mean, all the attorneys that offered their services offered it for free, that I talked to. And, you know, I sort of take

offense to it, that you would think that I would pick an attorney to represent the school district because they put some words in a website. I picked Thomas More because I thought they were the most qualified to defend Dover School District. And I talked to other people, not saying that the other attorneys weren't good, I just, from my talking with them and seeing issues, this is a constitutional issue, obviously, we don't want an attorney out of the yellow pages. We want someone that works with these types of cases. And to say I would pick someone because of And, you know, I

him to answer the question. question, sir? THE WITNESS: THE COURT: question back? MR. GILLEN:

Do you remember the

No, sir. Wendy, would you read the

10 11 12

I thank Your Honor and ask only

13 14 15 16

that you be solicitous of my concern that our clients should in some way be penalized because of anything that -THE COURT: I'm cognizant of that, and I'll

17 18 19 20 21

consider that a continuing objection, and I'll -- if I believe that the inquiry gets into that area, I'll certainly stop the examination. please. (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the last question.) THE WITNESS: one more time? I'm sorry. Can you say that Wendy, if you could,

words in that is absolutely ludicrous.

really, I take offense to that, that you think I would pick someone because that's what it says in a website. BY MR. HARVEY: Q. Actually, that wasn't my question. My question

22 23 24 25

was simply whether it's your understanding that the Thomas More Law Center is providing legal representation

121

122

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

without charge in this case to defend and protect Christians and their religious beliefs in the public square. A. here. Q. Let's go on with the Thomas More website. I Yes or no? No, that has nothing to do with what we're doing

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

going to overrule the objection because it's a speculative objection and I don't know what the question is going to be. So I'll overrule the objection. I'll

allow you to revisit it as he gets into his questions. BY MR. HARVEY: Q. Do you have that article in front of you, Mr.

actually went on it yesterday. P-822?

Matt, can you bring up

Bonsell? A. Q. A. Q. I believe. Yes. Okay. The sixth paragraph -- by the way, did you read From Gordy Slack?

This is the Thomas More Law Center website as of Do you recognize Mr.

yesterday, at least the home page. Thompson's picture? A. Q. Yes, I do. Hard to miss that.

And there's an article there

12 13 14 15 16 17 18

this before now? A. Q. page. No. Okay. Go to the sixth paragraph on the first And maybe Matt can bring it up on

that's reprinted.

It's reprinted on the website at the Do you

Thomas More Law Center website from salon.com. see that? A. Q. A. Q. P-824. A. Q. Okay.

I'll read it.

the screen, too. to include.

The one that begins, schools that want

It's written by somebody named Gordy Slack? Yes. And actually, we've pulled the article. It should be in your book. P-824? Yeah. MR. GILLEN: Judge, I object again. I mean, It's

Quotes, Schools that want to include the ID

debate in their curriculum deserve the right to do so, Thompson says. Denying them that right is a form of

19 20 21 22 23 24 25

both scientific and religious discrimination. And now he's apparently quoting Mr. Thompson directly. Quotes, ID is seeking a place in the

classroom because of its merits, close quotes, he says. Quotes, But it's being kept out because it is harmonious with the Christian faith, period, close quotes. Do you

I fail to see the purpose of this examination, except -THE COURT: Let's see where he goes. I'm

123

124

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

see that? A. Q. Yes, I do. And I just want to know if it was your

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

science, is merely a convention, close quotes, he says. Quotes, It can be challenged and changed at will by scientists themselves. And scientists are the products

understanding at the time that you passed the October 18th resolution, that intelligent design was harmonious with the Christian faith? A. Q. 18th? A. Q. No. Now if you go to the end of this article, the No. You didn't have that understanding on October

of their culture, too, close quotes. Doesn't he find it a little odd that a champion of unchanging and absolute moral values should take such a relativist stance on science? question. Quotes, Look, scientists don't sit there and ask, am I doing science or not? No scientist is going to He shrugs off the

10 11 12 13 The 14 15 16 17 18 19 Do you 20 21 22 23 24 25

say, this is empirical truth about the wrong subject so I'm not going to study it. No, they look at whatever

last two pages? A. Q. The last -Yeah, it's actually the fifth and sixth.

the empirical data is, and draw conclusions from it, close quote. Quotes, So you want to change the definition of science to include the supernatural, close quotes. Quotes, Yes, close quotes, he says. Quotes, We need a

sixth is the last page.

I want you to focus on the last And I'll read them to

five paragraphs of the article.

you once you have them in front of you and once Matt has brought them up on the screen. A. Q. I am on page 5 and 6, I'm there. The paragraph that begins, as we talk.

total paradigm shift in science, close quote. Do you see that language? A. Q. I see it. Now according -- at least according to what it

see that? A. Q. As we talk, the third paragraph from the bottom? Yes. Quotes, As we talk, Thompson bristles at

says there, as reported, Mr. Thompson seems to think that, for intelligent design to qualify as science, the definition of science needs to be changed to include the supernatural. And I want to know if that's your

the notion that ID is and always will be excluded from science. Quotes, What is science, and what is not

125

126

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

understanding as well, Mr. Bonsell? A. I guess I need more specifically what you mean by What do you mean by that?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

you know, the search for truth is -- the search for truth, no matter where it leads. leads there, then, okay. If it doesn't, then, no. wherever it goes. us. You know, it's You know, if the truth

supernatural. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A.

You can't answer the question just as it is? I want a specific definition. Something outside of nature. Something outside of nature? Yes. And what do you consider nature? The natural world. The natural world? So that encompasses the whole

Wherever science -- wherever it takes

I don't want science to be put in a little box and Is

say, you can't ever look outside that little box. that -MR. HARVEY:

May I confer with my co-counsel

for just a minute, Your Honor? THE COURT: MR. HARVEY: Honor. THE COURT: All right. Assuming Mr. Gillen You may. No further questions, Your

11 12 13

universe is what you're saying? Q. A. Yeah, the natural world. I'm still not sure I understand the question. I

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

think this was asked of me in one of my depositions. Supernatural? Q. A. Can you answer the question, Mr. Bonsell? Ask it again, please. MR. HARVEY: Can you read that back, please?

has some redirect, I'm going to exercise my prerogative before we break today, because you may have some lengthy redirect, is that a fair statement? MR. GILLEN: I think that I have accumulated

a considerable list of questions. THE COURT: I want to exercise my

I'm afraid I won't be able to get it right. (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the referred-to question.) THE WITNESS: I think I've said this. I'm

prerogative, and I have some questions before we break today. I would like, Mr. Harvey, if you would hand up

23 24 25

to me the witness's deposition testimony, specifically as it related to the question of the $850.00 check. I

not sure if this was in my deposition or not.

I mean,

the thing is, I've read other scientists, and you say,

believe it's the deposition as taken by Mr. Rothschild

127

128

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

in January of 2005. MR. HARVEY: marked up. Yes, Your Honor. My copy is Or if you

1 2 3 4 5 I want it now, if you have it. 6 7 8 9 Yes, Your Honor. I read from 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q.

Tell me why, in January of 2005, you didn't tell

Mr. Rothschild on his repeated questioning that your -that Mr. Buckingham was involved in that exchange? A. Basically because I understood the question to Do you know anybody that

Do we have an unmarked copy?

want, I could just have it delivered to your chambers in a few minutes. THE COURT: Hand it up.

be, who donated the books? donated? the books.

I only knew my father was the one that donated I am still to this day convinced, you know,

And can you direct me to the pages, and

specifically the pages, Mr. Harvey, that you referred to in your questions? MR. HARVEY:

that Mr. Buckingham didn't give any money towards the books. He said to me, this is money that he collected towards the books. And I didn't ask him. You know, he

page 13, line 6, through page 16, line 20. THE COURT: please. That's fine. All right. Give me a moment, All right.

didn't say -- if he would have said, some of this money is mine, or I put 50 bucks in the pot, or I did this, I would have told Mr. Rothschild at that time. Q. The specific question was asked to you, sir: You

I see where you were.

Let me ask you. BY THE COURT: Q. When did you first become aware of the fact that

have never spoken to anyone -- anybody else who was involved with the donation? don't know the other people. donated? A. Q. A. Q. And your answer was, I That didn't say, who

your father was in possession of the $850.00 that was being donated to buy Of Pandas and People? A. Well, Mr. Buckingham gave the check to me to pass He said this was money that he collected So I gave it to him.

That said, who was involved with the donation? I'm sorry. What --

to my father.

Okay.

for donations to the book. Q. A. Q. A.

Why did you -- I'm on page 16. Okay. Line 9. That didn't say, who donated? That

So you were the conduit -Yeah. -- by which your father received the $850.00? Yes.

said, who was involved in the donation? why you didn't say Mr. Buckingham's name.

Now you tell me

129

130

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A.

Then I misspoke.

Because I was still under -I -- well, I'm going back

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

A.

And that basically anybody, you know, if somebody He

from behind -- wait a second.

wanted to give money, they could give money to him. just passed, you know -Q.

here -- and so, yeah, that's my fault, Your Honor, because that's not -- in that case, I would have -- I should have said, Mr. Buckingham. Q. father. Tell me again why you gave the money to your Why did you utilize your father as the ultimate

Now the way I understand it from Mr. Buckingham's

testimony, Mr. Buckingham stood up in front of his church. Mr. Buckingham, despite testimony which was

somewhat confusing, obviously, apparently made a plea for funds for this book. Mr. Buckingham received in

recipient -- not the ultimate recipient, but as a conduit for this money? A. Q. Why he was the conduit? You took the money from Mr. Buckingham, if I You turn it over to your father. Is

addition to, apparently, his own contribution funds, which totaled $850.00. check be used? A. Why couldn't Mr. Buckingham's

Why did your father have to be involved?

understand it. that correct? A. Q. father. A. Yes.

I guess it could have been used, but put the

thing is, the money was going to him, and he was purchasing the books. And I think it was basically, if If not, he was going to buy

Yes, sir.

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Because the check was made specifically to your Why was your father involved? He agreed to -- he said that he would take it, I

somebody gave money, fine. the books. Q.

He was going to do it himself.

You don't know why Mr. -- in other words, you

guess, off the table or whatever, because of seeing what was going on, and with Mrs. Callahan complaining at the board meetings not using funds or whatever. Q. Why couldn't you use Mr. Buckingham's check?

don't know why Mr. Buckingham couldn't just purchase the books directly? Is that what you're telling me?

Because I still haven't heard an answer as to why your father -- why the funds had to be paid first to Mr. Buckingham, why Mr. Buckingham couldn't write a check. Why did he have to give the funds to your father? still haven't heard an answer. A. I guess he wouldn't have had to give the funds to I

What was the difference? A. books. Q. I understand that. My father was the one that agreed to do the

25

131

132

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

my father.

It's just that he was -- he had made -- he

1 2 3

books.

It's just that people had given money, and if --

had made the -Q. A. Who's he? My father. He had made the -- oh, I don't know He said that he would get -So basically, I guess, he

basically, if no one had given a penny, my father would have bought all the books. So he must have went out and

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

said, you know, if you want to give money, Mr. Bonsell is -- and so that's why the check is in his name, because the money was going to him. books. He was buying the

what word I'm looking for. donate the books, you know.

asked -- I guess you're saying, Mr. Buckingham went before his church. Q. A. He collected money -You heard Mr. Buckingham. And just -- because --

So he did put money towards the books, and he

would have bought all the books. Q. Now you were under oath. You know you were under

You were here.

He collected the money.

oath on January the 3rd of 2005, is that correct? A. Q. Yes. And your reason that you didn't mention Mr.

he had the check, gave me the money, I gave it to my father. Q. I still haven't heard an answer from you as to Tell

13 14 15

Buckingham's name on January 3rd of 2005 is because you said you misspoke? A. I was under the impression, Your Honor -- I was

why your father was the recipient of this money. me why. A.

Because he's the one that said he would donate

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

under the impression -- they were asking me who -- do you know anybody else? I mean, because I'm the one that I said, it

the books. Q. father. It wasn't -- the money did not belong to your It came from Mr. Buckingham. He didn't donate

brought my father forward in the testimony. was my father.

He was the only one that I knew that put Because, to be honest -- I

the books.

He received money from Mr. Buckingham that

money towards the books.

Mr. Buckingham received through donations from his church. Your father, unless I'm missing something, did He was the recipient of donated

mean, truthfully, I did not know that Mr. Buckingham gave any money towards those books. that. Q. I would have said that. I would have said

not donate the books.

Now like I said --

money and purchased the books. A. No, but my father donated money towards the

You knew on January 3rd that Mr. Buckingham had

possession of funds that he received from his church,

133

134

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

didn't you? A. Q. Not from his church, no. You knew that Mr. Buckingham had received funds,

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I don't 11 12

And hopefully, we're on track to finish the testimony on Friday. at 9:00 a.m. (Whereupon, the proceeding adjourned at 4:40 p.m.) We'll be in recess until Wednesday

which he turned over to your father, from someplace? A. Q. Oh, yes. Do you have any explanation for why Mr.

Buckingham in this same series of depositions in January of 2005 also failed to admit that he was involved in soliciting money for the purchasing of this book? you have any explanation for that? A. know. Q. A. Q. Were you here for Mr. Buckingham's testimony? I heard part of it. Well, let me represent to you that Mr. Buckingham Why he said he wouldn't solicit money? Do

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

testified in June of 2005 in his deposition that he didn't know where the money came from. explanation for why that is? A. I don't have any explanation for that. THE COURT: questions I have. All right. Those are the Do you have any

We'll reconvene tomorrow -We'll continue with the

Wednesday, pardon me.

examination of this witness on redirect by Mr. Gillen. And our trial days will be Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction by any means unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter. /s/ Wendy C. Yinger _______________________ Wendy C. Yinger, RPR U.S. Official Court Reporter (717) 440-1535 I hereby certify that the proceedings and evidence are contained fully and accurately in the notes taken by me on the within proceedings, and that this copy is a correct transcript of the same. CERTIFICATION


				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Stats:
views:57
posted:4/29/2008
language:English
pages:34